Essay: What is leadership?

1. What is Leadership
Leadership and management are frequently interchangeably used terms, however, how alike they might seem to be, in actuality they are not, they have distinct connotations. To have a better understanding of what Leadership is I propose we take a little journey through time and see the evolution of this concept.
1.1. Origins
A common belief is that the preoccupation with leadership is of Anglo-Saxon heritage. This kind of attitude towards headship was predominant in those countries and less common in countries where power was gained through inheritance, usurpation and/or appointment.
The Online Etymology Dictionary states that the appearance of the word ‘leader’ in the English language dates back to the 13th century (EtymOnline, http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?allowed_in_frame=0&search=lead. Accessed on 07th of May 2017). However, the word ‘leadership’ did not come into existence until the 19th century (EtymOnline, http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?allowed_in_frame=0&search=leadership. Accessed on 07th of May 2017). All online dictionaries say much the same thing. The verb ‘to lead’ comes from the Old English word ‘leden’ which had the meaning ‘to make go’, “to guide,” or “to show the way” (Leadership-Central, http://www.leadership-central.com/etymology-of-lead.html#axzz4gOR6C8S5, Accessed on 7th of May 2017).
In the first three decades of the 20th century the word ‘leadership’ communicates the notion of control and power centralization. At ‘the May conference on leadership’ Moor stated that ‘leadership is the ability to impress the will of the leader on those led and induce obedience, respect, loyalty and cooperation (Moore, 1927, p.124)
In the next decade Paul John William Pigors described leadership as ‘A process of mutual stimulation which, by the successful interplay of relevant individual differences, controls human energy in the pursuit of a common cause’ (Pigors, 1935, p.16).
A shift can be seen when comparing these decades. It is clear that domination is involved when one wants to gain obedience, respect and loyalty through enforcement of he’s will. This approach is closer to management than leadership. On the opposite side we have Pigors’s statement where he says that one can do the same thing using a more ‘humanitarian’ approach of differences and stimulation of energy in pursuit of common cause. Pigors’s statement is an interesting one knowing that in that period totalitarian regimes were on the rise in Europe.
Many points of view from that era were that leadership is to be expressed in terms of power to command and dominate, although a slow but steady evolution towards the modern notion of leadership can be seen. For example Edward Byron Reuter’s definition leadership in his 1941 ‘Handbook of Sociology’ is ‘Leadership is the result of an ability to persuade or direct men, apart from the prestige or power that comes from office or other external circumstances’ (p. 133). In my opinion Reuter almost completely abolishes the dominance from the notion of leadership. He’s approach is not only ‘humanitarian’ but one of trust and camaraderie, if I may. One of the most important things that he wants to say, in my opinion, is that no matter the status you possess in the company’s hierarchy, if you are able to move your team, give them purpose and direct them to achieve the common goal throw guidance and example, they will follow you.
My earlier can be reinforced by Copeland Norman’s statement of leadership: ‘Leadership is the art of dealing with human nature. It is the art of influencing a body of people by persuasion or example to follow a line of action’ (Psychology and the Soldier, 1942, p. 77), which must not, in any case, be confuse with compelling a person to do something through intimidation or force to follow in line of action.
In the half of the 20th century, specialist shift their view towards a more group like approach. It is only natural for things to evolve in this way knowing that in that period quality of life started to improve and with it life expectancy lengthened. Consumerism was on the rise and people were in need of services. The economy was growing both in the EU and US. Having more jobs and bigger teams to lead, specialist started to change their view from individuals to groups. This can be noticed in Gibb Cecil Austian’s chapter about leadership in Handbook of Social Psychology (1954). Gibb, being a psychologist the group approach in not surprising at all. He suggests that leadership is not to be approached from a monopoly view of an individual but a shared functionality among individuals.