FOREWORD
People are convinced by reason, but are moved by emotion.
The leader must convince and move.
It is not enough for the leader to know the proper way to proceed.
It also must be able to act.
The great leader needs both the vision and the ability to get the right thing.
All the really powerful bosses I have met had great intelligence, discipline, industry and tireless and deep-rooted self-confidence.
It was driven by a dream that allowed them to drag others along.
They all looked beyond the horizon, and some saw more clearly than others.
These phrases by Richard M. Nixon contain a great deal of experience.
The experience of a politician who led the most powerful nation on earth and who suffered firsthand all the internal and external problems of a government that made history with the blackest chapters in the underground world of palatial intrigue and this is in a area in which democracy is preached.
Therefore, these sentences and the research, which despite its brevity, is focused on the so-called leadership, in a very concrete way, to continue the study of this social phenomenon that we live especially in our country.
YGC
LEADERSHIP
Are leaders born or made? This question has prevailed throughout history.
It has been a source of discussion and controversy, which has not yet been satisfactorily resolved.
In general, leadership can be interpreted and analyzed from two perspectives:
1) As a personal quality of the leader and
2) As a function within an organization, community or society.
Although leadership was initially defined preferably under this first perspective, today, mainly as a result of research in the field of organization theory and administration, the conception of leadership as an function within organizations and society.
LEADERSHIP AS A PERSONAL QUALITY
At the dawn of history, the concept of authority was surrounded by a magical - religious aura.
The leader was conceived as a being superior to the rest of the group members, with special attributes.
An individual by demonstrating his superiority to the community became the leader.
These special powers or attributes were considered to be transmitted biologically from father to son or to be a gift from the gods, that is, they were born with them.
However, even then, it was sought through the transmission of knowledge and skills to create leaders.
Currently, with the rise of psychology, we have tried to base this perspective on the strong psychological bond that we establish with our father, the first archetypal figure we have.
Psychological studies of leadership maintain that we looked to our leaders for the security provided by the fatherly symbol.
And so, as we conceptualized our father as a perfect and infallible being, we reproduce this fixation towards our leaders, considering them, therefore, bigger, smarter and more capable than us.
For this reason, they explain, it is that highly gifted individuals will be seen as potential leaders and placed in a leadership position, where, in spite of themselves, they would eventually become leaders.
For a long time there has been an attempt to define and measure the traits and abilities of leaders, however, until now no consensus has been reached in this regard.
The lists and explanations are very diverse, extensive and heterogeneous.
These listings reflect, rather than the true characteristics of a leader, the prevailing values in society or the image of the ideal leader.
Although these abilities are no longer thought to be supernatural and the skills that make a leader common to all, it is accepted that leaders possess these to a greater degree.
Leadership studies show that leaders tend to be brighter, have better judgment, interact more, work well under stress, make decisions, tend to take command or control, and feel self-confident.
LEADERSHIP AS A FUNCTION WITHIN THE ORGANIZATION
As the theory of administration and organizations consolidates, especially in this century, the study of leadership as a function within organizations has gained strength.
This perspective does not emphasize the characteristics or behavior of the leader, but "the circumstances on which groups of people integrate and organize their activities towards objectives, and on the way in which the leadership function is analyzed in terms of a dynamic relationship."
According to this perspective, the leader is the result of the needs of a group.
Operationally, a group tends to act or speak through one of its members.
When everyone tries to do it simultaneously the result is usually confusing or ambiguous.
The need for a leader is evident and real, and it increases as the group's objectives are more complex and broad.
Therefore, to organize and act as a unit, the members of a group choose a leader.
This individual is an instrument of the group to achieve his objectives and his personal abilities are valued to the extent that they are useful to the group.
The leader is not because of their capacity or ability in themselves, but because these characteristics are perceived by the group as necessary to achieve the objective.
Therefore, the leader has to be analyzed in terms of or function within the group.
The leader differentiates himself from the other members of a group or society by exerting greater influence on activities and their organization.
The leader acquires status by making the group or community achieve their goals, his support results from achieving more for the members of his group, community or society than anyone else.
The leader has to distribute power and responsibility among the members of his group.
This distribution plays an important role in decision-making and, therefore, also in the support that the group gives it.
Since leadership is a function of the group, it is important to analyze not only its characteristics but also the context in which the group operates.
Well, it is considered that these characteristics determine who will become the leader of the group.
It has been found that an individual who excels as a leader in a constitutional organization does not necessarily excel in a less structured, democratic situation.
Depending on whether the situation requires quick and immediate action or allows deliberation and planning, leadership may fall on different people.
In short, "the leader is a product not of his characteristics, but of his functional relationships with specific individuals in a specific situation."
Although it is still believed that there are natural leaders, starting from the study of leadership from the perspective, the position that leaders can be created, just by reinforcing those leadership skills necessary for a specific organization or situation.
THE POWER OF LEADERSHIP
The power of a leader also emanates from the control of the environment that the other members of the group want or need to satisfy some need.
Media control constitutes what we call power.
What are these means? They are among the most diverse, ranging from position or even monopoly of economic resources to some particular knowledge.
"Such power can be used by an individual to either reduce the means of other individuals (punish), or increase their means (reward) to the ultimate end inducing these other individuals to provide them with the means for the satisfaction of their own needs. "
As long as group members believe that the leader is the best means available to achieve their group goals, they will hold them in that position, as long as they feel that the group is giving them more than they contribute.
Every leader, whatever his personal goals, must be useful to his followers, or he will not be a leader.
To the extent that he cares for the well-being of his followers, he will lose them.
But if, in pursuit of the well-being of his followers, he ignores the well-being of society as a whole, he will most likely lead his group to collide with the group of society, making it more costly for his followers to support him.
APPENDIX
CHARACTERISTICS OF A LEADER
In the direction of the organizations are the elites formed by leaders and technicians.
The leaders are always located in the elites sharing power with the technicians
(superspecialized individuals).
Although not all elites have technicians, we understand the leader by the following characteristics.
A) The leader must have the character of a member, that is, he must belong to the group he leads, sharing with the other members the cultural patterns and meanings that exist there.
B) The first significance of the leader does not result from his unique, universal individual traits (tall or short, appearance, voice, etc.).
C) But each group considers the leader to be the one who excels in something that interests them, or the brightest, or the best organizer, the one with the most tact, the most aggressive, holiest or most kind.
Each group develops its ideal prototype and therefore there cannot be a single ideal for all groups.
D) Fourth. The leader must organize, monitor, direct or simply motivate the group to certain actions or inactions depending on the need.
These four qualities of the leader are also called charisma.
E) Finally, another requirement that is presented to the leader is that of having the opportunity to occupy that role in the group, if this possibility is not presented, he will never be able to demonstrate his capacity as a leader.
THE CHARISMATIC POWER
Leaders called charismatics have social power, that is, they have the authority to socialize their individual thinking and behavior.
“Charisma” must be understood as the quality, which passes for extraordinary (magically conditioned in its origin, the same if it is a question of prophets than of sorcerers, arbiters, chiefs of
hunting or military leaders), of a personality, by virtue of which it is considered in possession of supernatural or superhuman forces and not accessible to any other, or as envoys of God, or as exemplary and, consequently, as chief leader, guide or Leader.
The way should not be valued objectively, the quality in questions, be it from an ethical, aesthetic or any other point of view, is a matter of complete indifference regarding our concept, because what matters is how it is valued by the "charismatic" domains, by the followers.
The validity of the charism is decided by the recognition born of dedication to revelation, of reverence for the hero, of confidence in the boss by the dominated; recognition that is maintained by corroboration of the supposed charismatic qualities always originally through the prodigy.
Now, recognition (in the genuine charism) is not the foundation of legitimacy, but a duty of those called, on the merits of vocation and of corroboration, to recognize that quality.
This recognition is, psychologically, a fully personal and faith-filled surrender, arising from enthusiasm or destitution and hope.
Charismatic domination is a process of communication of an emotional nature.
The administrative cadre of the ruling charismatics is not a bureaucracy, and less than anything a professional bureaucracy.
His selection does not take place neither from the point of view of the estates, nor from the points of personal or patrimonial dependence, but is chosen at the same time for charismatic qualities: the prophet corresponds the disciples, the prince of war the entourage, the chief in general the “men of confidence”.
There is no placement, no dismissal, no career or promotion, but only a call by the Lord, according to his own inspiration, based on the charismatic qualification of the word.
Charismatic domination is opposed, as out of the ordinary and extra-daily, both to rational domination, especially bureaucratic, as to traditional, especially patriarchal, patrimonial or estates.
What has been said hardly needs clarification, it is the same for the pure charismatic plebiscitary dominator (the empire of the genius of Napoleon, who made commoners, kings and generals) as for the prophets or military heroes.
The pure charism is specifically foreign to the economy constitutes, where it appears, a vocation in the emphatic sense of the term: as a mission or as an intimate task
He despises and rejects, in the pure type, the economic estimation of gifts as a source of income, which certainly occurs more as a pretense than as a fact.
Charism is the great revolutionary force, in times linked to tradition
Unlike the equally revolutionary force of the ratio that either operates from the outside by transforming life's problems or circumstances, or by intellectualization.
The charism means a variation of the direction of consciousness and action, with a complete reorientation of all attitudes, vis-à-vis previous forms of life or vis-à-vis the world in general.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Gil Villegas Francisco, "Leadership", Ed. Institute for Political Training, Mexico City, 1990.
Carl Jung, "Diportable Jung", De Campbell, New York, 1992, pg 60.
Knickerbocker, "Leadership and Conception of a Leader", Selected Readings, England, 1990, pg. 28.
Dudikoff, "Elements of Psychology", Mexico City, 1994.
Irma Munguia Zatarain, "Drafting and Documentary Research", UPN (Sep), Mexico, 1990.
Download the original file
