Heroic vs. post-heroic leadership
Order Instructions:
See attached instructions
SAMPLE ANSWER
Heroic vs. post-heroic leadership
Three key characteristics of heroic (unitary command) leadership
First, heroic leaders do not believe that regular people are as creative as they are. Whenever participation is proposed in the organization as a means of gathering ideas and insights from employees on a complicated problem, the firm’s senior managers will usually obstruct such activities (Wheatley & Frieze, 2010). Secondly, heroic leadership depends upon the illusion that somebody can be in control (Wheatley & Frieze, 2010). Heroic leaders consider engaging the entire system as a threat to their own control and power. In addition, heroic leaders always choose for control as well as the resulting disorder instead of inviting people in to solve complex and difficult problems. Thirdly, in unitary command, individual leaders are seen to personify corporate organizations and countries, and leadership is exercised by single individuals (Crevani, Lindgren & Packendorff, 2007).
Three key characteristics of post-heroic or shared leadership
In post-heroic leadership, the leader knows that problems are intricate. They know that to comprehend the entire intricacy of any issue, every part of the system has to be involved to take part and contribute (Wheatley & Frieze, 2010). Secondly, post-heroic leaders know that people readily support the things which they have contributed in creating; they do not expect people to buy in to projects and/or plans that were developed somewhere else (Wheatley & Frieze, 2010). The third characteristic is that in shared leadership, 2 competence areas and dissimilar personalities that complement each other are common. It could be collaboration between the CEO and chairman, or the COO and the CEO (Crevani, Lindgren & Packendorff, 2007).
Organizational advantages of unitary command perspective
One of the advantages of heroic leadership is that the leader is able to provide high control for high risk situations. Secondly, Wheatley and Frieze (2010) stated that as situations become more challenging and complicated, power has to move to the top with the leaders who really know what to do. The third advantage is that heroic leaders promise to get people from their mess and sometimes they actually have the answers to problems they face. They usually retreat into isolation with some of their advisors and try to find a quick and simple solution to an intricate problem (Wheatley & Frieze, 2010). The fourth advantage of heroic leadership is that heroic leaders believe in positive thinking – they always think positively – and this makes them to anticipate winning. They always keep their eyes on the prize and not what they would like to avoid. Anticipating positive results may sometimes result in success.
Organizational advantages of shared leadership perspective
The leaders in shared leadership perspective are frank and open enough to acknowledge that they do not know what to do; they recognize that it is actually absolute idiocy to rely only on themselves for answers (Wheatley & Frieze, 2010). Secondly, post-heroic leaders know that they can trust the commitment as well as creativity of other people in order to get the work carried out. They understand that regardless of where other people are in the organizational hierarchy, they could be as creative, diligent, and motivated as the leader, given the right invitation (Wheatley & Frieze, 2010). Thirdly, shared leadership avoids concentrating power on the hands of just a single individual. This form of leadership is particularly important when a company is faced with complex challenges which necessitate a broad set of skills that only one single person cannot possess (Crevani, Lindgren & Packendorff, 2007). Fourthly, the leaders in post-heroic leadership invest in important conversations amongst people from several divisions of the system as the most productive way of engendering new insights as well as possibilities for action. These leaders believe that people have the willingness to contribute; they encourage other people and create opportunities for others to contribute (Wheatley & Frieze, 2010). They also believe that many people want very much to find meaning as well as possibility in their functions and lives. They understand that difficult and complex problems can only be solved by involving other people (Wheatley & Frieze, 2010).
References
Crevani, L., Lindgren, M., & Packendorff, J. (2007). ‘Leadership Virtues and Management Knowledge: Questioning the Unitary Command perspective in Leadership Research’, in M-L Djelic and R Vranceanu (eds), Moral Foundations of Management Knowledge, Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, UK, pp159-176
Wheatley, M., & Frieze, D. (2010). ‘Leadership in the Age of Complexity: From hero to host.’ Retrieved from http://margaretwheatley.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/Leadership-in-Age-of-Complexity.pdf
We can write this or a similar paper for you! Simply fill the order form!
