- Hits: 1148
What Kind of Leader Are We Looking For?
Ilustrasi Leadership (SHUTTERSTOCK)
UNPAK - In everyday life we certainly hear two terms of leadership (leadership spirit) and leader (leader), especially in the realm of academic, political, or an organization.
However, what exactly do the two mean in a deeper context?
As social beings, humans interact a lot and relate to others because naturally humans need the help of others to achieve certain goals because.
Alfred North Whitehead said, "No one can achieve success without involving the help of others".
For the achievement of individual and collective goals of human beings must not rule out harmonious relations between fellow human beings because each human being has their respective roles and contributions in an achievement.
So, what must be stressed is that we must develop the quality of self to maintain the relationship, one of which is to improve the quality of leadership (leadership).
Basically every human being has a leadership spirit and the potential to become a leader both for himself and others.
However, as social creatures with regard to people, those who are elected as leaders need to pay attention to the quality of leadership which is oriented towards shared interests and is not dominant.
In general, leadership is one of the important aspects possessed by humans to interact with other humans, or in other words certain skills or abilities possessed by someone to control and influence many people to achieve certain goals for the common good.
Margi Gordon said that leadership is not always associated with power (authority).
Leadership is the ability of individuals to mobilize and involve themselves and others to achieve ideals that are idealized together.
In another view, leadership can also mean as an individual's ability to motivate and influence and direct others to achieve certain goals that embrace the interests of the people they lead.
Ilustrasi Leadership (SHUTTERSTOCK)
Whereas the word leader is often compared to the word boss, because the two vocabularies equally position a person with certain attributes of power to influence others in a group or organization, but philosophically both have different meanings.
A collegial leader, listen to the opinions of others, prioritize solidarity by treating the people they lead as partners, think of sustainability, reward mutual achievements, and help and direct their colleagues to develop their potential.
Meanwhile, a boss positions himself as a boss, draws professional boundaries from those he leads, likes to use the word 'I' rather than 'us', utilizes HR, looks more at achievement than process, and likes to govern others rather than direct.
Leadership is also related to one's leadership model. That is, every individual who hones aspects of his leadership has his own leadership model, including charismatic, transactional, and transformational leadership models.
Someone with a charismatic leadership model can be said to be lucky because not everyone has the gift of God.
He has the power of charisma that is naturally able to inspire and build good emotional relations between leaders and those who are led. Examples are Sukarno, the Dalai Lama, and Mahatma Gandhi.
Meanwhile, someone with a transactional leadership model likes to use his power to achieve the targets he wants and is top-down to control the people they lead by giving rewards and punishment.
The opposite of that is the transformational leadership model which is a variety of effective leadership because it prioritizes managing relations between leaders and those they lead by emphasizing harmonization between attention, communication, trust, respect, and risk (respect) risk).
To build a transformational leadership model, a person must have credible, visionary, loyal, honest, integrity, accountable, critical, collaborative, negotiative, creative, communicative, and humanistic characteristics because these qualities will form strong but inclusive leadership.
However, in a broader context, leadership is often attached to legitimacy because both are integral aspects that are interrelated and support one another.
Legitimacy implies the support, acceptance, and recognition of the people he will lead because this is one of the references why that person is worthy of being a leader.
Indirectly, legitimacy reflects the voices of the people he will lead so that a leader who has legitimacy is very understanding of the needs of others and knows how to make decisions and policies that are oriented towards the common interest.
However, the problematic of legitimacy is the full awareness of a leader to uphold moral values and honesty because in certain cases legitimacy can be transactional and manipulative by using certain conditions.
Beetham suggested that the power gained from legitimacy must meet three conditions.
First, power must be based on standard and formal and binding rules.
Second, the standard rules must be recognized and justified in the same view both of those who have legitimacy and those who provide legitimacy.
Third, the issue of legitimacy must be proven because there is an expression of approval from the party being governed.
In short, leaders, leadership, and legitimacy are three central aspects in choosing a leader.
If there is an imbalance, especially the legitimacy aspect, then all forms of resistance which are subversive and depart from injustice will lead to a strong rejection that results in a state of leadership that is not conducive.
Author: Agnes Setyowati
Dean of the Faculty of Social and Cultural Sciences (FISIB) Pakuan University
Editor: Heru MargiantoDownload full storyLeadership