well,my friend pointed out leadership as a type of ''Quality''. According to his view there are many different ways to understand leadership and many different perspectives from which to define or describe it so it is generally contextual. He defines Leadership as the art of influencing others to their maximum performance to accomplish tasks, objectives, and projects.
In general, a leader is interpreted as someone who sets direction in an effort and influences people to follow that direction. How they set that direction and influence people gets into the operational definitions based on context. For example, a good leader displays degrees of focus, unclouded vision, ability to adapt readily to varied demands and novel situations, etc.
It pays to realize that there are also different types of leadership models that can be applied within QA - or any organization. For example, the current popular one is situational leadership. Another is collaborative leadership. Yet another is process leadership. Another one that is making the rounds lately is thought-leadership.
In order to understand the full spectrum on the view of leadership, I propose a definition, which certainly is in bad taste, but is the one that many leaders end up following.
Leadership: The activity by which one seeks to maintain their leadership position by objectifying their team to their superiors and assuming credit for the positive results of the team.
There are many reasons this pattern is exhibited, not all of them are because of selfishness or arrogance.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment