Show simple item record

dc.creatorMwiandi, Mary
dc.date05/02/2013
dc.dateThu, 2 May 2013
dc.dateThu, 2 May 2013 19:33:27
dc.dateYear: 2011
dc.dateThu, 2 May 2013 19:33:27
dc.date.accessioned2015-03-18T11:28:55Z
dc.date.available2015-03-18T11:28:55Z
dc.identifier
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11071/3519
dc.descriptionEdited by Joseph Kwaka, Okoth Okombo, Barrack Muluka & Betty Sungura-Nyabuto with an introduction by Henry Indangasi.
dc.descriptionOne of the fundamental principles of effective leadership has remained the same for generations simply because leadership touches on human relations. What often changes are the tactics that leaders employ to get things done depending on the needs. Therefore, as we look at leadership that is effective in this century, we are not in any way re-inventing the wheel. Domesticating past leadership styles to suit current realities is the way to begin. Not all styles of leadership are effective in the same sense. It was fine long ago to embrace leaders who used command or who employed what is known as the boss syndrome. This kind of leadership, although used in some quarters, has proved to be less effective in the present world. The “do as I say” leader will face a reasonable amount of resistance. Times have changed and so should the style of leadership. The command leadership style of yesteryear simply cannot bear results in a world that is more liberal. Commanders, even in the military, have learned there are better ways to achieve results with followers in today’s world. Leadership has been studied through three theoretical frameworks at different points in time. First, in the 1930 and early 1940s, most scholars based their research and writings on trait theories. The emphasis of these theories was that individual characteristics of leaders are different from those of the non-leaders. The premise of this school was that leaders were born, not made. Such leaders were the so called “big men” whose names sometimes would not be mentioned in public. Realising that the traits alone cannot capture the qualities and the achievements of some leaders, leadership studies came to include aspects of special behaviours that make leaders stand out. Scholars in the 1940s and the 1950s examined who and what leaders are based, on behavioural theories. The premise of these theories is that behaviours of effective leaders are different from those of ineffective leaders. The leadership styles during this period and which spilled into the 1960s were “people-focused” or “result-focused”. The whole idea was that leaders were judged based on what they were able to achieve and what they did while in office. It did not really matter whether or not they were “born leaders”. A leader could become effective through training and development. 96 Challenging the Rulers: A Leadership Model for Good Governance The 1960s and the early 1970s saw the emergence of a new type of leader whose leadership could not effectively be explained by the earlier theories. Thus, new studies began to view leadership through the lense of situational or contingency theories. The premise of these theories is that unique factors or particular situations determined whether a specific leader was effective or not. In this respect, situational factors interacted with the leader’s traits and behaviour to influence leadership effectiveness, generally producing what is widely known as charismatic leaders. These are leaders who are usually admired by their followers because of the energies and enthusiasm they bring into the scene. Their followers show near total dedication and unquestioning loyalty. More studies later revealed that there are leaders whose leadership practices transcend the theories above. Some scholars in the 1980s and 1990s saw leadership as skills-based. Here the emphasis is on what effective leaders do, based on the skills acquired. This kind of leadership was highlighted by the transformative theories which tend to investigate what transactions of traits, behaviours and situations allow certain people to transform for excellence. In the 21st century, the emphasis shifted to visionary leadership. The idea of visionary leadership is synonymous with marshalling people behind a compelling vision of a better future. In this situation, the interest is in what is required to inspire, unite and mobilise the masses. Finally, there are alternative leadership theories which examine other types of leadership which do not quite fit into the categories above. These include servant leadership, authentic leadership and collective leadership. For this chapter, we shall examine servant leadership. Servant leadership reflects a philosophy that leaders should be servants first. It suggests that leaders must place the needs of their followers ahead of their own interests in order to be effective. Servant leadership begins from the natural feeling that one really wants to serve. That one naturally wants to help others is then followed by a conscious choice to aspire to lead. Servant leadership is characterised by the following attributes: empathy, stewardship, listening, awareness, persuasion and foresight, commitment to the personal, professional and spiritual growth of the followers. Servant leadership is about moving individuals and communities at large to a higher level of progress.
dc.description.abstractOne of the fundamental principles of effective leadership has remained the same for generations simply because leadership touches on human relations. What often changes are the tactics that leaders employ to get things done depending on the needs. Therefore, as we look at leadership that is effective in this century, we are not in any way re-inventing the wheel. Domesticating past leadership styles to suit current realities is the way to begin. Not all styles of leadership are effective in the same sense. It was fine long ago to embrace leaders who used command or who employed what is known as the boss syndrome. This kind of leadership, although used in some quarters, has proved to be less effective in the present world. The “do as I say” leader will face a reasonable amount of resistance. Times have changed and so should the style of leadership. The command leadership style of yesteryear simply cannot bear results in a world that is more liberal. Commanders, even in the military, have learned there are better ways to achieve results with followers in today’s world. Leadership has been studied through three theoretical frameworks at different points in time. First, in the 1930 and early 1940s, most scholars based their research and writings on trait theories. The emphasis of these theories was that individual characteristics of leaders are different from those of the non-leaders. The premise of this school was that leaders were born, not made. Such leaders were the so called “big men” whose names sometimes would not be mentioned in public. Realising that the traits alone cannot capture the qualities and the achievements of some leaders, leadership studies came to include aspects of special behaviours that make leaders stand out. Scholars in the 1940s and the 1950s examined who and what leaders are based, on behavioural theories. The premise of these theories is that behaviours of effective leaders are different from those of ineffective leaders. The leadership styles during this period and which spilled into the 1960s were “people-focused” or “result-focused”. The whole idea was that leaders were judged based on what they were able to achieve and what they did while in office. It did not really matter whether or not they were “born leaders”. A leader could become effective through training and development. 96 Challenging the Rulers: A Leadership Model for Good Governance The 1960s and the early 1970s saw the emergence of a new type of leader whose leadership could not effectively be explained by the earlier theories. Thus, new studies began to view leadership through the lense of situational or contingency theories. The premise of these theories is that unique factors or particular situations determined whether a specific leader was effective or not. In this respect, situational factors interacted with the leader’s traits and behaviour to influence leadership effectiveness, generally producing what is widely known as charismatic leaders. These are leaders who are usually admired by their followers because of the energies and enthusiasm they bring into the scene. Their followers show near total dedication and unquestioning loyalty. More studies later revealed that there are leaders whose leadership practices transcend the theories above. Some scholars in the 1980s and 1990s saw leadership as skills-based. Here the emphasis is on what effective leaders do, based on the skills acquired. This kind of leadership was highlighted by the transformative theories which tend to investigate what transactions of traits, behaviours and situations allow certain people to transform for excellence. In the 21st century, the emphasis shifted to visionary leadership. The idea of visionary leadership is synonymous with marshalling people behind a compelling vision of a better future. In this situation, the interest is in what is required to inspire, unite and mobilise the masses. Finally, there are alternative leadership theories which examine other types of leadership which do not quite fit into the categories above. These include servant leadership, authentic leadership and collective leadership. For this chapter, we shall examine servant leadership. Servant leadership reflects a philosophy that leaders should be servants first. It suggests that leaders must place the needs of their followers ahead of their own interests in order to be effective. Servant leadership begins from the natural feeling that one really wants to serve. That one naturally wants to help others is then followed by a conscious choice to aspire to lead. Servant leadership is characterised by the following attributes: empathy, stewardship, listening, awareness, persuasion and foresight, commitment to the personal, professional and spiritual growth of the followers. Servant leadership is about moving individuals and communities at large to a higher level of progress.
dc.formatNumber of Pages:p.95-115
dc.languageeng
dc.publisherEast African Educational Publishers Ltd
dc.rightsBy agreeing with and accepting this license, I (the author(s), copyright owner or nominated agent) agree to the conditions, as stated below, for deposit of the item (referred to as .the Work.) in the digital repository maintained by Strathmore University, or any other repository authorized for use by Strathmore University. Non-exclusive Rights Rights granted to the digital repository through this agreement are entirely non-exclusive. I understand that depositing the Work in the repository does not affect my rights to publish the Work elsewhere, either in present or future versions. I agree that Strathmore University may electronically store, copy or translate the Work to any approved medium or format for the purpose of future preservation and accessibility. Strathmore University is not under any obligation to reproduce or display the Work in the same formats or resolutions in which it was originally deposited. SU Digital Repository I understand that work deposited in the digital repository will be accessible to a wide variety of people and institutions, including automated agents and search engines via the World Wide Web. I understand that once the Work is deposited, metadata may be incorporated into public access catalogues. I agree as follows: 1.That I am the author or have the authority of the author/s to make this agreement and do hereby give Strathmore University the right to make the Work available in the way described above. 2.That I have exercised reasonable care to ensure that the Work is original, and to the best of my knowledge, does not breach any laws including those relating to defamation, libel and copyright. 3.That I have, in instances where the intellectual property of other authors or copyright holders is included in the Work, gained explicit permission for the inclusion of that material in the Work, and in the electronic form of the Work as accessed through the open access digital repository, or that I have identified that material for which adequate permission has not been obtained and which will be inaccessible via the digital repository. 4.That Strathmore University does not hold any obligation to take legal action on behalf of the Depositor, or other rights holders, in the event of a breach of intellectual property rights, or any other right, in the material deposited. 5.That if, as a result of my having knowingly or recklessly given a false statement at points 1, 2 or 3 above, the University suffers loss, I will make good that loss and indemnify Strathmore University for all action, suits, proceedings, claims, demands and costs occasioned by the University in consequence of my false statement.
dc.subjectleadership
dc.subjectgovernance
dc.titleChallenging the rulers: a leadership model for good governance
dc.typeBook Chapter


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

  • SU Scholarly Articles [88]
    Assorted scholarly writings by University Staff outside of specific faculty affiliation

Show simple item record