Introduction
The surprising events that marked the end of the second decade in the twenty-first century have given rise to the collective awareness that our future will not resemble our past experiences by any stretch of the imagination. A global pandemic changed the performance landscape from a multi-century trend of traveling to and from work to a predominantly static mode of operating, alerting organizations that what they thought to be impossible or undesirable had become an overnight requirement, which opened myriad new workforce structuring possibilities. The blatant expressions of racially fueled inequalities instigated a rapid increase in awareness about long-standing and solidly maintained structures to benefit some groups and keep others at a disadvantage. The already mounting call for gender equality and the increased demand for transparency and conscious diversity implementations completed the insight that we are on the cusp of a major reinvention of practically everything we thought we stood for.
Although many successful movements have been initiated at operational and tactical levels in organizations, there is one factor that has remained constant: change and inclusion are far more successful and more rapidly implemented when leaders are spearheading or strongly advocating them. In this chapter, we will review the phenomenon of leadership from various present-day appealing angles.
Leading in a Consciously Alert Setting
As indicated before, todayâs leaders are expected to perform in differentâ more inclusiveâways than their predecessors. Let us briefly consider some specific organization-related aspects that lie at the foundation of the changed views:
- There have been critical shifts in societal values, originated by changes in the work landscape, leading to a greater employee awareness and a subsequent greater need for involvement as a satisfaction tool (Higgs, 2003). Breeze and Pamala (2020) underline that todayâs workforces expect greater involvement from managers and business owners than just doing the right thing. Leaders should therefore regularly consider the bigger picture of their performance, increase their tolerance levels for diverse environments, remain focused on their core principles rather than just following every new trend, surround themselves with people who have complementary skills, and expand their horizons (Marques, 2010a).
- Shifts in investor focus: in contrast to the obsession with revenues and shareholder returns in the twentieth century, investors are now more interested in the quality and depth of an organizationâs leader (Higgs, 2003). Corporate reputation has emerged into a discipline of its own, against the backdrop of the numerous ethical scandals and the growing mistrust in leadersâ moral standards during the initial years of this century (Resnick, 2004). Dupont and Karpoffâs (2020) Trust Triangle provides a useful framework to conceptualize the relationships between trust, corporate accountability, legal liability, reputation, and culture.
- Ability to lead organizational change: More than 70% of organizations have problems adhering to change (Higgs, 2003). Yet, todayâs leaders have dramatically been likened to âgenerals leading troops across a rugged, unmapped, quake-prone battlefield, against many different armies in a struggle to the death that never endsâ ( Developing Agile Leaders, 2010, p. 12). Therefore, rather than being leery and inhibited toward change, they have to thrive on it. Unlearning is one of the first steps in making all of this possible. Outdated or potentially harmful routines can best be disarmed through unlearning. This has to happen at every level of an organization and begins with the individual. It is critical that unlearning practices are undertaken first individually and then taken across the organization ( Unlearning to Succeed, 2019).
- The influence of excessive stress on employees: With the elevated demands on organizational performance, the understanding has increased that employees will perform better and be more committed if they have a leader they trust and have a good relationship with (Higgs, 2003). Workforce members are impacted when stress accumulates. Given the many turns in the contemporary performance landscape, stress accumulations are a real factor to consider. Leaders could support their employees by responding to stressful situations with openness, support, and compassion.
The Ever-Evolving Phenomenon of Leadership
As many definitions as there are about leadership, as many application guidelines are there as well. One of the popular ones in theory and practice toward a greater understanding and inclusion is Bolman and Dealâs (2008) four frames theory. Hill (2011) describes these four framesâstructural, human resource, political, and symbolicâas âvantage points from which to analyze organizationsâ (p. 36). He refers to the structural frame as the one that clarifies roles and relies on hierarchies in the workplace; the human resource frame as the one that considers people and situations within the organization from the perspective of a formal leader; the political frame as an interaction-based one, focusing on the consequences of such dynamic interactions, with power, mediation, and agenda setting as critical factors; and the symbolic frame as the one that considers the cultural underpinnings of the organization and that understands the ambiguous and uncertain nature of human collaboration (pp. 36â37). The four frames provide a decent context to help analyze the complexity of leadership. However, the question to be considered is whether limiting ourselves to four static frames is still sufficient in todayâs volatile world and its ever-changing organizational climates.
Growing Awareness Around Soft Leadership Skills
Soft skills have gradually but steadfastly risen to the top of leadership qualities. Goleman (2000) explains soft skills as pertaining to self-awareness, self-regulation, motivation, empathy, and social skill, whereas tough or hard skills pertain to intelligence, analytical/technical skills, determination, rigor, vision, and the like. Sethi (2018) warns that implementing soft skills demands continuous training and practice. He describes this effort as an ongoing and enduring activity which begins from oneâs personal comfort zone, including his/her family and self-efforts, and should then be followed by initiatives taken within organizations.
Soft skills should be imparted at regular intervals and at different stages of oneâs career. Soft skills are life skills which are needed at every juncture of oneâs personal and professional life to be a better human being and to be a better performer.
The time when leaders had to be charismatic, swaying, convincing, die-hard, conniving, and only bottom-line-focused is behind us. Formalâ whatever that meantâis out, and an âinformal approach,â in which skills that are often still considered misplaced by those who were exposed to die-hard, unilateral leadership in the past century, has taken the front seat. Maccoby (2002) touches on one of the critical competencies in contemporary organizational performanceâtrust. He describes trust as a deceivingly gentle concept that can have tough consequences when neglected. Maccoby stresses that trust influences othersâ perceptions of our product, leadership, knowledge, or partnership. One of the most common factors to damage trust is poor communication. Maccoby points out that there are still leaders who seem to think that communication happens sufficiently when they voice or write their orders. These individuals fail to consider the option of integrative communication, which turns employees off and negatively affects their perceptions of the leaders. Communication, especially in the current era in which diversity, equity, and inclusion are expected at every level of organizations, is no longer a one-way street. Dixon, Belnap, Albrecht, and Lee (2010) describe it as âa two-way process in which an exchange of thoughts, feelings, or ideas takes placeâ (p. 37).
Nonetheless, there are still organizations with leaders who have been exposed to obsolete theories and behavioral models and refuse to change. Unfortunately, even management educators in higher education institutions have been co-responsible in perpetuating this embarrassing trend. If we look deep enough, we find that there are many reasons why the shift to a more creative approach in leadership gets stagnated in some organizations till today. Some examples are: a) established structures in major corporations; b) reluctance from current managers to sacrifice power and prestige; c) fear that the new system will ultimately fail; d) lack of trust in the qualities and motivations of employees; and e) ignorance, caused by a lack of awareness or ill will regarding the need for transformation.
An Overview of Leadership Qualities
In our continuously changing performance and interactive climate, leaders will now, more than ever before, have to be critical and creative thinkers, because they are practically reinventing the entire concept of leadership in a different performance setting. The pace of performance, change, and problem-solving has picked up enormously and has even landed in a mind-boggling rapid way right at the commencement of the third decade in the twenty-first century. Instead of the proverbial âgreat manâ or âgreat womanâ traits, which were customary in the past century, this era calls for leadership as a process, consisting of collaboration and novel thinking to address problems with little or no familiar structure (Novelli & Taylor, 1993).
Todayâs leaders work with their followers. They ensure compatibility between these followersâ values and the organizationâs needs, as well as opportunities for followersâ growth. Contemporary leaders are aware that their strategies should include effective ways to produce cooperation, high efficiency, and participative roles to empower employees (Kennedy, 2010). Clarke and Mahadi (2017) are in strong support of the importance of mutuality with regard to recognition respect in leaderâfollower relationships. Their studies have found that, where leaders and followers are in agreement in their ...
