Leadership in the 21st Century

NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.

NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.

Table of Contents

Executive Summary
Introduction
Leadership
Types of challenges facing leaders in the 21st century
Contemporary approaches to Leadership
Key Findings
Conclusion
References

Executive Summary

Many authors on leadership cite that conventional leaders and leaderships of the past are inadequate in addressing the needs of the 21^st century. This is because, presently, the world is characterised by paradox, unpredictability and unprecedented events brought about by change.

Hence, most modern leaders faces tremendous demands, than ever before. Similarly, conventional leadership styles that were once embraced have become a liability to modern leaders. Thus, the 21^st century leaders need to unlearn conventional wisdom associated with conventional leadership and shift to a new paradigm of leading.

This report highlights the definition of leadership. In achieving this goal, the writer, through literature review, gives different definitions of leadership and leadership styles.

Further, the writer illustrates; market forces, people issues and leadership incompetency among others, as some of the challenges facing leadership in the 21^st century. Similarly, the writer singles out transformational and charistic leadership as the contemporary leadership styles practices by leaders in the 21^st century.

Introduction

The conflict of talent acquisition, societal changes, globalisation and the ever shifting size of organisations are contributing to the realignment of leadership styles in the 21^st century. Consequently, the yearning for an ethical and sustainable organisation, ignited by business scandals, and the increasing realism that people should be steadfast in preserving global natural resources for future sustainability is also taking a toll on present leaders.

Thus, leaders are required to perform on ethical and moral standards aimed at preserving a balance between the eco-system and the societal needs to guarantee business success. Therefore, unlike in the past, the measure of leadership success in the 21^st century is increasingly being tied on aspects such as ethical and global responsibilities among others.

Cegarra-Navarro and Moya (2005) points out that for leaders to be competitive in the 21^st century, they need to wield influence, embrace a vision that inspires people and dispel their doubts, they need to possess abilities to enhance connections, and they need to redefine the way they address the tasks at hand. Hence, without influence, leaders are finding it difficult to assert power and control in their respective areas of command.

Consequently, leaders need to attain assent in addition to obedience, and embrace imitators and subordinates. Cegarra-Navarro and Moya (2005) illustrates that the 21^st leader is not satisfied by getting people to do the right thing his way, he/she also need them to perceive things his/her way too.

Leadership

Cegarra-Navarro & Moya (2005) defines leadership as a course compelling social influence. This is where an individual can conscript the support of others in achieving or accomplishing a common task or activity. Though Cegarra-Navarro & Moya definition is valid, presently, the term is viewed as an occasional act, rather than a role.

The basic understanding of leadership has not lost its meaning, in fact many authors have come up with other definations of leadership based on their understanding Cegarra-Navarro & Moya, 2005). Bartram and Casimir (2007) illustrate that leadership revolves around a person who is in charge of a team or a group. Besides being a leader, leadership involves possessing power over others and wielding authority necessary for decision making.

In the 21^st century, the meaning of leadership has remained unchanged (Bartram and Casimir (2007). Philosophers such as Socrates, Plato and management gurus have demonstrated many efforts in understanding leadership. They claim that, in these changing times, leadership is a source of answers for the success of an individual and organisations.

Bartram and Casimir claims that every individual has his/her own intuitive understanding of leadership, anchored on a mixture of learning and experience (2007, p.15), thus, it is difficult to capture a succinct definition of leadership. Consequently, the mode in which leadership is rendered and understood is influenced by an individual’s theoretical viewpoint.

We have individuals who perceive leadership as the value of established set of traits or as a characteristics influenced by ‘leaders’ (Bartram and Casimir (2007). On the other hand, other individuals claim that leadership is a social process that spring from a group or a team relationship (Baker&Gerlowski, 2007). These differing views, held by different people, have resulted divergent of thoughts about leadership.

Baker & Gerlowski (2007) highlights four challenges that make unanimity on reaching a common definition of leadership. He points out that the process’ challenge, that is, lack of consensus on whether leadership emanate from personal qualities of the leader, or whether the leader persuades fellowship in what he/he does Finch (2011).

Consequently Baker & Gerlowski (2007) demonstrates that the ‘position’ problem helps to define a leader, that is, is the leader in charge of the situation through influence or authority? Moreover, the philosophical problem associated with leadership makes it challenging to reach a consensus on the definition of leadership.

However, according to Magretta (2012) philosophy defines a leader in terms of causality, the intentional and the influence he/she has over the behavior of followers. Avolio and Gardner (2005) also cite that ‘purity’ is also a challenge contributing to lack of mutual consensus on the definition of leadership.

Purity defines leadership as embodied in groups or in an individual making it a purely human phenomenon ( Jones, 2012).

In addition to these divergent views, Magretta (2012) illustrates that some designations of leadership limit it to pure non-cohesive influence on shared objectives, thus, within such contexts, leaders such as Stalin and Hitler among others would be viewed as leaders, but as tyrants toiling for their own benefits and contingent on intimidation, violence and threats rather than embracing the refined practice of interpersonal influence connected to true leadership.

However, Avolio and Gardner (2005) claims that basing leadership on such distinction is problematic because the actions of almost all leaders could be viewed as more or less beneficial to some individuals and groups.

Northouse (2004) in a recent review of leadership theory cited that four major themes in the way in which leadership is perceived. He demonstrates that leadership is a process, entails influencing what happens in a group context, and encompasses goal achievement. Hence, he defines leadership as a “process where an individual influences a group of individuals to attain a common objective or a goal’ (Northouse, 2004, p. 3).

Similarly, Yukl (2002) provides a more collective concept of leadership. He illustrates that “most leadership definitions mirrors the theory that involves a social influence course, whereby deliberate influence is exercised by an individual or a group over other individuals or groups to configure the activities and relationship in an organization or in a group” (Yukl, 2002, p. 3).

In a nut shell, Yukl (2002) assert that leadership is a a unique phenomenon. It involves numerous but important social, organizational and personal processes. It largely depends on a process of influence where people are inspired to tailor their energies towards attaining group goals.

Hooper and Potter (2000) offer a different perspective of understanding leadership. He illustrates that in understanding leadership, people should look at it from the viewpoint of a person’s disposition to accept accountability and responsibility for him/her and a group of other individuals in a given facet of life.

He further demonstrates that leadership is character that is shown when an individual chooses to accept the duty by his/her own will and not when he/she is assigned with the equivalent by a superior power. Moreover, Hooper and Potter (2000) note that a leadership is sparked by motivation, inspiration and enthusiasm.

Thus, a leader should be able to infuse these skills passionately to others. This will allow them to take command in their own respective contexts, give out their best in accomplishing the goal and inspire them to support each other towards a collective accomplishment (Magretta, 2012).

Types of challenges facing leaders in the 21st century

Kachra (2012) cite various leadership challenges facing leaders of the 21^st century. Some of these challenges include; market forces, leadership competencies and people issues among others.

Market Forces

Market forces are driving change in many organisations at a macroeconomic level, thus; these forces are demanding more leadership acumen from leaders and the organization as a whole. For this purpose, market forces are viewed as a collective effect of the deeds and wants of those present in the market, either supplying or demanding a service or good.

Some of these market forces shaping present leaders include; globalisation, increase of multinational firms, mergers and takeovers. Also, Kachra (2012) cites that the world has witnessed significant diversities in the workplace. This has been as a result of globalisation and a stronger necessity for explicit technical skills.

Kachra (2012) notes that many large organizations have gained economies of scale as they allot overhead expenditures across production units. Thus, leadership has been put to test here. Managers needs effective skills on how to manage market forces. This includes having values and morals in understanding diversity, leading by example whereas commanding authority among others (Kachra, 2012).

Also, Nevins and Stumpf (2012) points out that the advance of technology has significantly reduced the costs of reaching geographically scattered markets. Kachra (2012), however, notes that the market forces to embrace globalisation and increase the size do not guarantee the survival of the organization.

Thus, sound leadership is a prerequisite. For example, Nevins and Stumpf (2012) cites that among the 500 firms in the Fortune magazine in 1970, about one third ceased to survive through the early 1980’s. Besides, Kachra (2012) also indicates that during the 1980’s among the 230 firms in the Fortune Magazine disappeared from the best Fortune 500 firms.

Hence, Kachra (2012) acknowledges that neither the reputation nor the size of the firm guarantees its continued survival or success but effective leadership is a necessacity.

Seddon and Onyett (2011) cite that compared to demand based market forces, the source of human capital is enduring ubiquitous and powerful change. The supply of human capital is diverse and individual employees need to command a high level of technical expertise in their area of specialization to be successful.

At an outright minimum, firms are accommodating diversity, hence, the manner the company manages its diversity grants it a competitive advantage in formulating new ideas and matching the differences that arise to work demands.

Concisely, organisations are struggling with increasing deregulation. Some contend with the older older work force, hence; they find it challenging to embrace change and re-invent them (Hooper & Potter, 2000). However, for most firms clear leadership that directs and encourage reinvention and embrace its strong history and foundations continues to be successful.

People Issues

People issues is also a major challenge affecting leadership in the 21^st century. Manager’s perceives that people’s issues involves relationships with others and the organisation. Traditionally, these concerns were amicably handled by the Human resources, and were seen basic aspects of the organisation.

However, Gayle et al (2011) indicate that in the 21^st century, people issues and concerns forms a major aspect of the firm. Presently, Gayle et al (2011) notes that more workforces in the industrial world hold conventional full-time jobs and at the dawn of each year, more people are either getting to self-employment, part time or finding temporal jobs.

Thus, this scenario illustrates a critical challenge in which the present and future manager will encounter. Besides, what is obscure to a manager is that the employee possess different expectations and demands on his/her organisation. More significant is that the employer-employee relationship looks more different than in the previous century.

With increasing globalisation and complexity, most organisations are demanding for abilities and skills from their leaders to increase competitive advantage and facilitate decision making. Hence, managers leaders need to have the ability to balance the needs of employee globally and customers’ needs. However, this balance wiis becoming a challenge to strike efficiently and profitably in the years to come.

Diversity is becoming a strategic differentiator rather than being a desired demographic profile. The managers of today are being brought up in productive diversity than in traditional taxonomies, where issues of ethnicity, race and other social dividers were simply undermined or ignored.

However, as the workforce is growing in diversity, leaders need to accept individual differences in the workplace and devise creativity which will increase productivity and appreciate the talented work workforce established by diversity.

Hooper and Potter (2000) note that organisations today are increasingly devising different methods of accomplishing tasks. They are placing more emphasis on the use of interdependent teams, as few people are knowledgeable. This is unlike in the past where an employee policy book or given forms of behavior was required.

Though this strategy sound to elicit chaos in the organisation, it offers a great opportunity for a manager who is flexible, adept and intelligent to seize it and assist the organisation to move forward (Hooper and Potter, 2000).

In the 21^st century, talented human capital seen as the prime component for business success. Businesses are accepting the change of power from proprietors and senior management to knowledge workers.

Moreover, specialists are becoming less worried with the conventional perception of career and more concerned in what is referred to self-fulfillment. In achieving aspects of self-fulfillment, organizations are advancing more revenues in attracting, forming and retaining competent professionals.

Leadership incompetencies

The advancing nature of business, practiced by global organisations has ignited a unique form of leadership competency. Presently, most organisations arrenot willing to be tied on the hard-nosed and top down structures or directions previously famous with the traditional leadership styles. They view that empathy and flexibility and retaining the best values of the business is the way forward in outwitting erratic impediments in the organisation’s leadership. Thus, Hybels (2009) demonstrate that this is the characteristics of the 21^st leaders. Seddon and Onyett (2011) note that because of this leadership challenge, leaders who take up leadership roles need to be technologically savvy and inspirational. Though thesem skills make them devoted to service, details, to be entrepreneurial focus and be inclusive than being autocratic they make them better leaders. Also, Nevins and Stumpf (2012) cite that the leaders of the 21^st century needs to handle the leadership challenge of being able to articulate value proposition, that is, maintaining value position in a vibrant market and revitalizing others to embrace it. They also need to invest in a business model that directs and guides employee decision making process at all levels of the organisation. Moreover, Seddon and Onyett (2011) states that leaders need to commit to a culture that stimulate learning and mentorship.

Contemporary approaches to Leadership

Transformational Leadership

Nevins and Stumpf (2012) points out that transformational leadership is a new form of leadership which has become more common in the 21^st century. Most organisations have embraced this form of leadership to encourage organisation growth and improve teamwork in the organisation.

According to Seddon and Onyett (2011) transformational leadership supports capacity growth and development and fosters a higher level of commitment amongst followers anchored on the organisation’s objectives. Egner (2009) illustrates that transformational leadership happens when a leader widens and raises the group’s needs when they understand the objective or the mission of the group.

According to Nevins and Stumpf (2012), a manager embracing this form of leadership motivates the group or employees to look beyond their personal self-interest for the purpose of the group. Transformational leaders raise individuals from their low positions of need to a higher level. Consequently, they support the group by motivating the followers to exceed their personal interests in view of attaining other collective purposes.

The 21^st century organisations are in need of such leaders because they engender trust, loyalty and respect among their followers. Egner (2009) points out that because transformational leaders are in constant touch with other people, he/she instills values and beliefs that are beneficial and can be imitated by the group as a whole.

The critical aspect of transformation leadership is that leaders and followers helps in raising each other’s morality, attainments and motivations to a degree that wouldn’t have happened if each was working on his/her own.

Williams and Sullivan (2011) points out four factors that makes up a transformational leader. He cites that a transformational leader has an idealized influence. This dimension is al about building trust and confidence and acting as a role model that his/her followers can emulate. Confidence that a leaders has establishes a foundation for embracing the organisation change.

Also, a transformational leader posses inspirational motivation. Gayle et al (2011) note that this is related to idealized influence, hence; he/she uses this skill to motivate the entire organisation. They help in creating a clear view of the future and grant his/her followers the opportunity to perceive the meaning in their tasks or activities. Moreover, they stimulate intellectual acumen. This involves arousing and shifting the follower’s awareness of challenges and their ability to solve those challenges.

Transformational leaders questions beliefs and norms and urge followers to be creative. They also empower followers to contribute towards decision making without fear. Lastly, Gayle et al (2011) note that transformational leaders value individualized consideration. This approach involves responding to a specific and unique need of the follower, which in turn is replicated in the organisation’s transformation process (Avolio and Gardner, 2005).

Charismatic Leadership

Charistmatic leadership entails a leader who amasses followers through a indent of charm and personality, rather than using any form of external authority and power. Thus, in the 21^st century, more managers organisation are embracing this style of leadership to build relationship with emloyees. According to. Finch (2011) charismatic leadership comprises of three major factors.

These factors are the social context which calls for such a leader, the leader and his/her attributes and the interaction between the leader and his followers. Nevins and Stumpf (2012) illustrates some of the traits that makes up a charistimatic leader. He cite that a charistmatic leader as a motive to attain power.

In this case, they often do not embrace conventional power, ask for official position or post but what motivates them is the social power. Finch (2011) cites that this trait allows their followers to accord them respect and perceive them as their savior. Moreover, they want to win their positions using their followers hearts. Once they win power, they remains popular for a longer time.

Also, Margarita (2012) note that charistimatic leaders are open to change. Whereas othey type of leaders try to uphold the status quo for fear of change, Gayle et al (2011) points out that charistimatic leaders are fully open to change. They represent the change and at a time, they like associating theselves with the change created, thus, it is interesting to note that they are more powerful in the contexts which necessistated the change.

Key Findings

In the 21^st century, most organisations are devising strategies strategies which can assist it to expand and increase productivity. Thus, to achieve these goals, they demand for leaders who possess transformational leadership skills. These leaders are seen to hold strong vision, charisma and strong moral behavior, hence, they are able to motivate others in achieving a common goal.

Despite the challenges facing the 21^st century leaders such as market forces, people issues and leadership competency, managers are using their abilities to handle these challenges and ensuring that organisations remains steadfast in achieving its goals. However, more needs to be done to enhance their leadership skills (Avolio and Gardner, 2005). This will include training, mentoring and coaching among others.

In the 21^st century, most organisations are embracing leadership styles that add value to the organization. Thus, transformational and charistimatic forms of leadership styles are common. These styles are being seen to motivate the workforce besides granting them the opportunity to be part of the organisation’s decision making stakeholders.

Nevins and Stumpf (2012) illustrates that these leadership styles grants freedom to employees or group, hence, less leader’s participation. The group can come up or develop their own goals and solve their own problems; hence, freedom without interference, which is a clear motivation for the group’s development (Hooper & Potter, 2000).

Conclusion

Leadership has evolved over the ages. Many people views that effective leadership instills motivation, inspires and help in effective decision making. However, leadership which is riddled with unacceptable practices can cause low productivity, build hostility and slow down organisation’s progress.

Organisations are expanding and building new alliances, thus, in the 21^st century, a leader is required to be a person who has the acumen for business and human relationship. The aspect of human aspect is critical because the 21^st century require leaders who can motivate, inspire and influence people. Hence proficiency in understanding human aspects is critical. Similarly,

The 21^st leader need to understand the synergistic power of leadership and professionalism.

References

Avolio, B. & Gardner, W. 2005, Authentic leadership development: getting to the root of positive forms of leadership. Leadership Quarterly, Vol. 16, pp. 315 – 338.

Baker, S. & Gerlowski, D. 2007, Team effectiveness and leader-follower agreement: an empirical study. Journal of American Academy of Business, Vol. 12, No. 1, pp. 15 – 23.

Bartram, T. & Casimir, G. 2007, The relationship between leadership and follower in-role performance and satisfaction with the leader. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, Vol. 28, No. 1, pp. 4 – 19.

Cegarra-Navarro, J. & Moya, B. 2005, Business performance management and unlearning process.Knowledge and Process Management, Vol. 12, No. 3, pp.161 – 170.

Egner, T. 2009, Behavioral Leadership – The Managerial Grid, Grin Verlag, Berlin.

Finch, S. 2011, “LMMatters Leadership and Management seminar and showcase, London, UK, Strategic HR Review, Vol. 10 no, 6, pp. -76-89.

Gayle C., Avery, H., and Bergsteiner, H. 2011 “How BMW successfully practices sustainable leadership principles”, Strategy & Leadership, Vol. 39 no. 6, pp.11 – 18.

Hooper, A. & Potter, J. 2000, Intelligent Leadership: Creating a Passion for Change,. Random House, London.

Hybels, B. 2009, Courageous leadership, Grand Rapids, Michigan.

Jones, R. 2012, “The leadership journey”, International Journal of Leadership in Public Services, Vol. 8 no. 2, pp.77 – 82.

Kachra, A. 2012, “Strategic leadership development: the new frontier for Indian firms”, Strategic Direction, Vol. 28 no. 2, pp. 67-78.

Magretta, J. 2012, “Michael Porter answers managers’ FAQs”, Strategy & Leadership, Vol. 40 no. 2, pp.11 – 15.

Nevins, M. D. and Stumpf, S. A. 2012, 21st Century Leadership: Redefining Management Education: Educating Managers in the Modern Era. Web.

Northouse, P. G. 2004, Leadership: Theory and Practice (3rd Edition), Sage Publications Ltd, London.

Seddon, J. & Onyett, S. 2011, “‘Get out there and do some leadership through getting knowledge’”, International Journal of Leadership in Public Services, Vol. 7 no. 1, pp.62 – 67.

Williams, P. & Sullivan, H. 2011, “Lessons in leadership for learning and knowledge management in multi-organisational settings”, International Journal of Leadership in Public Services, Vol. 7 no. 1, pp.6 – 20.

Yukl, G. A. 2002, Leadership in Organizations: Fifth Edition, Upper Saddle River, NJ, Prentice-Hall.

Click Here To Order Now!