Public Leadership And Diversity: Definition Of Public

Public Leadership and Diversity 8/25/19 Definition of Public Leadership There are

There are many definitions of a public leader and public leadership. This is because there are many definitions that define a leader. It could range from a villager who takes time to advise the young people in that village, a gang leader, or even a political leader (Grint, 2016). However, when it comes to public leadership, a public leader has been defined in simple terms as a person who holds a public office and has the mandate to serve and offer guidance to the community. The public leader is expected to serve various purposes including creation of an inspiring vision for the society, motivating and inspiring people under them to make efforts to achieve that vision, managing vision delivery and offering other forms of support to the teams commissioned to spearhead projects aimed at attaining that vision.

In vision definition, the public leader is expected to apply various skills, including decision making and problem-solving, analytical as well as innovative skills (Tummers, 2016). The leader is expected to be a team player and a motivating factor to the people. Besides, the leader is expected to give direction in case of any confusions or clarifications that may be needed in the process.

Overview of Public Leaders

There are many leaders both incorporate as well as public administration who have done remarkable things in their capacities. These leaders have brought various transformations and left notable marks of change.

For this assignment, I chose to discuss formers American President Truman and Former British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher. The aim of this section is to identify how the two leaders applied leadership skills as public leaders to bring reforms in their societies and also internationally. The 33rd American president Harry Truman was eulogized as the decisive president of the USA. Many people have termed that compliment as deserving for him. This is because, he was the president that made many decisions on behalf of the USA that defined the direction of America on both national and international issues (Leland, 2017).

These included the debates on atomic bombs, the interests of the USSR in Turkey and Greece, as well as the ideological battle between communism and capitalism. The president displayed leadership qualities like problem-solving, consultation, and team spirit as well as determination. Truman made firm decisions and was always ready to be held to account for those decisions. This shows that he was always confident in the choices he made. He always took the time to consult his cabinet before making key decisions.

This again shows a leader who encourages teamwork and collective responsibility in making decisions. According to Truman, it was better to have pooled brains involved in making critical decisions than having one head to do the work (Leland, 2017). He always took time to listen to the two sides of an argument before he made any decision. Lastly, Truman never feared criticism at any point in his leadership. According to him, criticism was healthy and indicated a democratic nation.

Besides, he also gave his critique on matters he felt were wrong without fear. This was evident when he attended a meeting with the Ku Klux Klan, not intending to identify himself with the group but to criticize them. He referred to them as a bunch of cheap fakers and told them to go to hell (Leland, 2017). This shows a leader who clearly defined his position and defended it without fear. Margaret Thatcher also displayed great qualities in her leadership.

Some of the most memorable traits that she will be remembered for is leading by conviction and not consensus. She was leading at a time when every decision she took faced great criticism and opposition (Tengblad, 2018). These decisions included privatization, reforms in education, and the position of Britain in the Falklands war. She also could turn her weaknesses or criticism to her advantage. This was manifested when one of the young Journalists referred to her as the Iron Lady, with an intent of mockery.

However, she used this to her advantage and to drum support for She opinions. Besides, she also brought great reforms at a time when Britain was regarded as the Sick Man of Europe (Tengblad, 2018). These reforms included the deregulation of the London Stock Exchange, which made the city to be a leading financial center. Leadership Roles The former South Africa President Nelson Mandela, De Klerk, and Bishop Desmond Tutu played a significant part in bringing changes in South Africa on political and social fronts. In the 1990s, the country was facing significant challenges, including Apartheid, which was regarded as the major challenge of the time.

After his release from prison in 1990, Mandela revived the ANC party and embarked on tours across Africa to lobby for the liberation of the countries under colonial rule. These countries included Tanzania, Zimbabwe, and Zambia. The revival of ANC led to a liberation struggle where the prisoners in Robben Island began a hunger strike to demand their release so that they could support ANC in its operations (Salmon, 2019). Mandela also proved excellent diplomacy skills by accepting to hold talks with the government of the day concerning the killings of demonstrators in the same year. Besides, he had an influential personality, and this was displayed by the great reception he received globally in his visits.

One of the significant marks that he left was his fight against Apartheid by using the ANC party. He also opposed the delay tactics that were being used by the regime to deny them freedom. Desmond Tutu is remembered for the reforms that he brought using his position as a clergyman. He was in the forefront in leading demonstrations like civil disobedience, including leading the Ecumenical Defiance Service and also taking part in significant protests (Salmon, 2019). He also agreed to host Mandela and his wife in the Bishop’s Court after Mandela’s release from prison.

Besides, he invited Mandela in his church to address the congregation against Apartheid. Moreover, he encouraged the use of non-violent approaches to fighting racism. F. W De Klerk is remembered for allowing the protestors to carry on with their demonstrations despite attempts being made by the local administration to stop the protests. He granted them the freedom to demonstrate.

He also engaged in talks with ANC leaders like Zuma, Mandela, and Mbeki about the mode of transition for the country from the colonial rule (Salmon, 2019). The most significant mark that he left was that of lifting the ban against ANC and allowing for the release of Mandela. Gender Diversity Gender diversity in the work environment could be described as the act of granting equal opportunities to men and women to serve in any capacity. In the past, men dominated many places of work, and women were allowed temporary roles (Bendl, 2019). Women were viewed as being inferior to men in the workplaces.

However, this has changed immensely in the current days. Many organizations and states are appreciating the contribution of women in leadership and even workplaces (Bendl, 2019). Women have now occupied even the highest offices that were formerly male-dominated. We have seen women CEOs, Presidents, and Prime Ministers who have done remarkable things in society. I remember I once worked in an organization where my head of the department was a woman. There are a lot of things to appreciate in her way of leadership, including excellent organizational skills, commitment as well as paying attention to all the details in the workplace. Besides, I realized that women are more concerned about the affairs of their workers as compared to men. The only shortcoming I would say I observed was the great emphasis she laid on uplifting the female workmates forgetting that the men also required attention. Strengths My leadership capacity will be greatly influenced by my public relations skills. This includes my capability to influence action, my outgoing nature, and perfect communication skills. My ability to influence people towards a particular direction can help me to lobby the members of the public to support a particular agenda or plan. Besides, my outgoing nature is crucial in enabling me to interact with the people I lead and get their views and opinions. Lastly, my communication skills are essential since communication is key to the sharing of views and ideas.

Leadership Theories

The general conduct of the public is determined by who is leading and in charge of the public. These people who regulate and govern the general behavior and the course of action that is observed by the general public is referred to as a public leader. A public leader thus governs his/her people from their offices that have legal positions for and responsible for their respective office functionality. To lead people, you need to have leadership personalities that are inbuilt in you. These traits cannot be acquired merely from professional institutions, and when acquired, they are not effective like when one is born with them. This argument for a public leader being equipped with inborn personalities is supported by two theories, the great man theory, and the trait theory.

With the grand man theory, a public leader personality should intermarry with the expectation of the public. Personal intrinsic factors determine how they associate with others and the feeling they have for others. To site this inborn public leader personalities, some people are good at social participation while others are not. From the great man theory, people who have been born with the perfect social association and participation skills make good public leaders (Wong, Ramalu & Chuah, 2019). From the trait theory, this theory supports inborn public leaders de to what they portray about themselves (Henkel, Marion & Bourdeau, D 2019).

Due to the human ego that everyone has, here are those personalitie that cannot allow everyone pursues leadership and when they do, they might not be compatible with their subjects, in this case, their followers. For a public leader, they must be intelligent enough to understand metrics of public participation. For a person without such a trait, even after equipping them with professional public leadership skills, they might never fit for public leadership office. Public leaders use certain leadership styles that introduce their mode of leadership as one which emanates within them. From how they take themselves in the office, they identify themselves as the perfect match for the office from the leadership styles that they adopt to match their inborn traits of a public leader.

In most cases, perfect public leaders adopt pace-setting techniques of leadership and also the democratic style of leadership. These two styles, among others, are adopted by born public leaders because they match their trait of social interaction they were born with. Not everyone can lead by examples to be role model calls for intrinsic personalities. Taking responsibility by yourself requires not professional skills but inborn personalities. People can get educated on leadership skills, but they might not be able to lead by example.

Leading by example takes a personal understanding of the influence that this strategy has thus the person who does not have the knowledge and appreciation of this strategy, educated or not might be effective. To set the pace to be followed by others requires personal attributes that encourage someone towards the role of leadership. To set the pace to be followed requires a special understanding of different people's personalities and how to harmonize them together to achieve the desired public leadership goal. With democratic leadership, not everyone can lead from their professional acquired skills and knowledge. Some people might get misled by their professional acquisitions to think they have a total say in public leader.

A public leader understands that people are well-governed when they are given that chance to contribute positively to their governance. The ability to engage others and rely on their attributes and contribution in decision making is a factor of personalities. Take, for instance, an introvert; they might never acknowledge democratic leadership and take leadership entirely as their responsibility. Leadership Differences There are differences that measure metrics of a leader's success in a public setting, private setting, and in non-profit making organizations. The compatible leadership strategy used in any of this setting might differ with leadership style in other contexts.

However, the difference in adopted leadership strategy and leadership theory adopted in one environment might differ in another setting, but the overall goal is the success of leaders in each of these settings. There are some strategies that might be misleading in public sector leadership, but this might facilitate the success of a leader in a non-profit making organization. This differences in the course of action taken by the leadership in these setting introduce leadership as a context that cannot be universalized to get its effective functionality in different environmental settings. Take, for instance, the difference in leadership strategy employed in the public sector and one employed in the private sector.

Public sector acknowledges the contribution of all for a common goal, but this is different in a private sector setting (Lee & Schachter, 2019). In a private sector setting, a leader in such a position is geared to realize their personal goals and objectives; they do not thus mind others’ contribution in achieving this goal, and they take it entirely as their responsibility since the leadership style they adopt in this setting is authoritative leadership style and with no dispute, they realize their goals and targets within the set time. This, however, is a bit different from how the success of a leader in a public setting is to realize success in their leadership by engaging all in decision making.

The actual participation and inclusion of leadership is a leadership style called democratic leadership. In both sets, leaders are successful in attaining their goals but the leadership style adopted in these settings differs. Such is a difference between successful leaders in a public setting and private setting. Leadership Behavior The desired leader, both in a public setting and private setting are in most cases one who has leadership traits that they were born and nurtured through professional knowledge. An influential leader in these two settings, in most cases, which are taken to be a leader.

However, this requirement for a born leader might deviate in a non-profit making organization. Non-profit making organizations are meant to meet the interest of the involved parties. In cases where none of these parties is willing for leadership, this does not mean that the non-profit organization won't have leadership responsible for its management. In these cases, the interested parties in the non-profit making organization in question are forced to teach someone on leadership who takes charge of leadership for the success of the organization. The success, in this case, differs in the type of leader who is responsible for the daily operation of the setting in question.

The public and private sectors are well and best served by leaders who have leadership traits they were born with, but this is not fundamental for a leader in a non-profit making organization. I think for a perfect leader, they are geared with inborn personalities but due to a situation, needs, and challenges, they are subjected to their leadership is defined and molded to which type of a leader they can make and become. To cite introverts, this is a personality that one is born with, and whether efforts are made to equip such a person with leadership, their characters might not allow them. It requires someone with natural personalities that conform to leadership requirements. When a need arises, and such people are challenged to take chances and confront the situation, they stand out against all the odds and make good successful leaders (Rhode, 2019).

That is one that leadership is an essential factor that is accelerated and nurtured through experiences, needs, and challenges that one is subjected to. In conclusion, not everyone can make a leader, but it requires natural personalities one was born with to fit in leadership. These personalities enable such people to confront needs and challenges they are subjected to, and their success, as well as that of others, introduces them as leaders.

References

• Grint, K., Jones, O. S., Holt, C., & Storey, J. (2016). What is leadership? The Routledge companion to leadership, 3.
• Tummers, L., & Knies, E. (2016). Measuring public leadership: Developing scales for four key public leadership roles. Public Administration, 94(2).
• Leland, S. B. (2017). Decision making in the grey zone: lessons from Truman, Eisenhower, and the development of nuclear strategy (Doctoral dissertation).
• Tengblad, S. (2018). Resilient leadership: Lessons from three legendary business leaders. The Resilience Framework (pp. 89-108). Springer, Singapore.
• Salmon, P., & Jewitt, M. (2019). The Unwinding of Apartheid: UK-South African Relations, : Documents on British Policy Overseas, Series III, Volume XI. Routledge.
• Bendl, R., Hainzl, A., & Mensi-Klarbach, H. (2019). Diversity in the Workplace. In Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Psychology.
• Wong, H. C., Ramalu, S. S., & Chuah, F. (2019). An overview of leadership and the emerging of relational leadership. Journal of Human Resource and Leadership, 4(1), 32-43.
• Henkel, T. G., Marion Jr, J. W., & Bourdeau, D. T. (2019). Project manager leadership behavior: Task-oriented versus relationship-oriented. Journal of Leadership Education, 18(2), 1.
• Lee, Y., & Schachter, H. L. (2019). Exploring the relationship between trust in government and citizen participation. International Journal of Public Administration, 42(5), 389-400.
• Rhode, D. L. (2019). Preparing leaders: The evolution of a field and the stresses of leadership. Santa Clara Law Review, 58(3), 411-440.