CONSTRUCTS OF LEADERSHIP IN THE 21ST CENTURY

Leadership as a study is one of the most interesting and demanding disciplines of all times! Absence of true leadership hierarchy creates anarchy! Hierarchy creates succession - and for that to be effective - Leadership Coaching and Mentoring is Critical.

Leaders need to define and understand leadership in terms of its philosophical foundations, etymology, meaning and contextual application. We need to redefine and contextualise foundational constructs of leadership and its basis in terms of the 21st century dictates and followers.

In this Knowledge Age, continuous relevant training must avoid the rhetoric, cliche and repetition of already known concepts of leadership. Practical and applicable solutions for the present day demands a leader who will offer something different and his/her political promise must be devoid of the "usual" rhetoric.

This leader will first seek/acquire knowledge - leaders need to have clarity of the SITUATION, demonstrate understanding of the situation and propose a way through the SITUATION. They might not have full knowledge, because it must be understood that knowledge is progressive - hence we encourage students to seek "new knowledge".

This means that leaders cannot afford NOT to continuously sharpen their skills in a 3D thrust through :
(1) Seeking new knowledge on the demands of the SITUATION.
(2) Emotional Intelligence - successful leaders are those who understand themselves well because through that they are able to understand those that follow them and ultimately form solid partnerships/relationships. 
(3) Actively getting involved in encouraging those following them to take part in problem-solving (that is the psychology of Persuasion and Influencing).

An intelligent leader knows that roles are cyclical - they have a life cycle and are not subject to entitlement. Leadership should serve as an answer to a SITUATION (Problem), and provide solutions to the FOLLOWERS affected by the SITUATION in a particular time.

Leaders also need to note and recognise that followers know immediately as soon as the SITUATION changes, that means leaders cannot be left hanging echoing the past in answering to the present (as much as both followers know the present is a product of a past - sometimes it is not entirely so) - because leading shoud not only be REACTIVE but PROACTIVE and PROGRESSIVE.

The changing nature of the SITUATION demands the changing nature of the leadership task and nature of leadership in that particular time. If I were to make an example, the nature of leadership towards the SITUATION of the demise of Colonialism in the past two decades might not be the same as the ECONOMIC TRANSFORMATIONAL DICTATES (SITUATION) of post-apartheid era (TIME).

That is why modern-day democracy allows people in different forms of organisations to elect leaders who will recognise the importance of their :
(1) Term
(2) Mandate 
(3) Deliverables

While in office, how he/she (the leader) responds is part of being a leader. It is there - while in office and carrying out his/her mandate that is crucial for him/her to know when it is time to hand over. Leaders need to know when their leadership is no longer wanted.

Clinging to a position one is elected to illustrates an inherent sense of entitlement. Can we truly say an elected leader is entitled to any position? Where would we leave policies and procedures that govern collective leadership? Do we have cases where abdication or claim of entitlement to a leadership position brought solutions to an organisational SITUATION in history?

LEADERSHIP FRAMEWORK FOR REPRESENTING SOCIAL DECISIONS

A leadership scholar should seek with interest the origin of leadership and its place in prehistoric and modern societies. This would require demonstration and logical understanding of the basic process of societal and organisational formation - how sects, entities, organisations and even cultures are formed. Classical observation of relationships between members of societies and these formations (organisations) will help determine the origins of leadership and its application in modern democratic times.

Studying basic relationships of human beings in any given time - one will notice differences in critical and important aspects of interaction in a particular SITUATION - this being:
(1) Competence (knowledge, Skills and Abilities)
(2) Personalty
(3) Linguistics - understanding of words, meanings and application (Communication and Influence).

These differences in society and organisations create a hierarchy - levels and that can be defined as origins of leadership. Hierarchy is healthy for any organisations - but its term and situation should be well understood by those who lead and those who follow. It is often said that the state of a nation is a reflection of its leadership - the same way, the state of an organisation is a reflection of its leadership and understanding of hierarchy in this context.

As I conclude - it should be observed that absence of Hierarchy creates the presence of Anarchy! What is the state of your organisation? Does its leaders reflect this framework for representing SOCIAL DECISIONS IN THE CURRENT SITUATION - YOUR SITUATION?

Profile your leadership today - let us show you how!