Over the influence process of leadership, it needs power. (Northhouse, 2003). Leaders are usually described as wielders of power in the discussion of leadership because they are individuals who dominate others. Power is the capacity or potential to influence another party (Mint berg, 1983; Pfeiffer, 1981, 1992). It is talked as the basis of leadership according to many political theorists like Machiavelli through academic political scientists such as Marx in the twentieth century. People have power when they have the ability to affect others’ beliefs, attitudes, and courses of action. Ministers, teachers, doctors, and coaches are examples of individuals using power to effect change in people. In commercial, there are two major types of power, position power and personal power (Bass, 1960; Etienne, 1991): Position power refers the power a person derives from a particular rank in a formal organization system, for example, department heads have more power than clerical staff in position. It includes potential influence derived from legitimate authority, control over resources and rewards, control over punishments, control over information, and control over the physical work environment. Personal power refers the power a leader derives from followers. It includes potential influence derived from task expertise and potential influence based on friendship and loyalty. Followers give leaders power when leaders act in ways that are important to them. Power is also inherent in a person’s position in the organization. (Bass, 1960; Etienne, 1991)
According to social psychologist French (1959), leadership is power differentiation among members of a group. According to the French and Raven power taxonomy, there are five major types of power drawn in leadership: 1) reward power – the influenced person complies in order to obtain rewards controlled by the leader; 2) coercive power – the influenced person complies in order to avoid punishments controlled by the leader; 3) legitimate power – the influenced person complies because he or she believes the leader has the right to make the request and the influenced person has the responsibility to obey; 4) expert power – the influenced person complies because he or she believes that the leader has special knowledge about the best way to do something; and 5) referent power – the influenced person complies because he or she admires or identifies with the leader and wants to get the leader’s endorsement (French/Raven, 1959). Most leaders make use of a combination of these five types of power depending on the leadership style used at any given time. Demanding leaders, for example, use a combination of legitimate, coercive and reward powers, to dictate the policies, plans and activities of a group. On the other hand, democratic or participative leaders would use mainly referent power to involve group members in the decision-making process.
The authority and position power that comes with appointment by superiors lead formal leaders into effective leadership. Power activity requires leader’s capacity to influence the attitudes, values, or behaviours of others. Besides, people learn to engage in social exchanges early in their childhood, and they develop expectations about reciprocal condition and equity in these exchanges. The expectations of members in society about what leadership role a person should have in the group are influenced by the person’s power. The degree of power accorded a leader based on the members’ evaluation of the potential contribution that can be gained from the leader to the members. Members of an organization usually agree to comply with rules and obey the directions from leaders in return for the benefits of membership. (March & Simon, 1958) Power occurs in relationship and is used by leaders and followers to benefit their communal goals. Above all, effective leadership unavoidably connects with power activity.
Leadership also involves in political activity as in power activity; conversely, it is much more like transformational leadership. Political processes involve efforts by members of the organization to increase their power or protect existing power sources (Pfeiffer, 1981). Although the ultimate source of political power is usually authority, control over resources, or control over information, political power involves influence processes that transform and magnify the initial basis of power in unique ways. One of unique ways of political leadership is about appealing leadership. One of the most powerful American presidents Ronald Regan is a typical example of appealing leadership. When Ronald Reagan said, "What I'd really like to do is go down in history as the President who made Americans believes in them again", Ronald Regan probably was not thinking too much about the definition of leadership. (Degregorio, 1997) However, without realizing, Ronald Regan was pretty much defined it. As mentioned earlier, the definition of leadership is having an impression on others, and not only inspiring them, however, making a physical difference in their lives. Without that aspect, there is not only no effective leadership, but there is no leadership at all. To have this ability to make impressions and differences, you need communication skills. One who can not communicate well will never be a leader. A leader must know how to speak so his ideas are understood in the correct way. Ronald Reagan very own nickname was "The Great Communicator." The examples that prove his nickname true are his great acting skills, the fact that his talks with the Soviet Union push to the Russian move toward capitalism. The next aspect of effective leadership is the ability to make decisions to change, and not always stick to the status quo. What good is a leader who is afraid of change? Despite economic setbacks, President Reagan reduced government spending tremendously, and cut back on business regulations to strengthen the business sector of the economy. By making this change, the inflation rate fell 13% to 2%, and created thousands of jobs for Americans. When Reagan entered office, the unemployment rate was 10.8%, when he left it was 5.3%. This economic growth would have never come, if Reagan did not have the will to change. (Degregorio, 1997)
Lukes (1986) argued “The short-term transaction between the leader and follower is catalyzed by transformational leadership.” The leadership of Winston Churchill, whose political leader overcame the most difficult time in the UK, or the leadership of Sun Yat-Sen, Martin Luther King can only be conceived of as leadership that added to any cost-benefit exchange a transformation of the followers’ needs from those at lower levels to higher levels concerns for achievement, glory, humanity, country, faith, or family, which demanded excessive costs relative to tangible benefits. Self-interests were transcended; cost benefit calculations were abandoned. It is difficult to envisage of the emotional response to the Ayatollah Khomeini and the rush to sufferings by the Iranian masses merely as a social cost benefit exchange between a leader and followers. On the positive side of reinforcement, appeals to self-interests alone will not result ultimately in leadership that is able to reward followers as much as they want. Continued attention to followers’ self-interests alone will not permit a group, organization, or society to operate optimally. A culture of cooperation is needed, as is trust in the benefit of optimal organizational outcomes (Miller, 1987). An appealing leader who appeals to interests that transcend the individual member will be more likely to crate such a culture than will a leader who is limited to contingent reinforcement and the use of individual incentives. In the public sector, political leadership must appeal to both self-interests and shared values (Meier, 1988).
People have been interested in leadership since the beginning of civilization, and we have been studying leadership for over a century. There are many approaches of leadership studies; yet, we have made substantial progress in learning about leadership. Nevertheless, much remains to be studied. It becomes clearer every year that effective leadership at all levels of society and in all of our organizations is essential for coping with the growing social and economic problems confronting the world. Learning to cope with these problems better is not a luxury but a necessity. (Yolk, 2002)
Overall, effective leadership is a process that involved an individual influences a group of individuals to achieve the goals or perform the tasks successfully. Leaders are persons govern others. They are described as wielders of power. Effective leadership use power as their instrument to influence followers. Leadership also involves in political activity as in power activity. Effective leadership is inevitable in power and political activities. However, power and political activities are alike in some levels, especially when authorities have power to take over the control in all kind of activities.
Bibliography
Bass, B.M. (1960). Leadership, psychology, and organizational behaviour, New York: Harper.
Etzioni,A.(1991). A comparative analysis of complex organizations. New York: Free Press.
Fleishman, E.A., Mumford, M.D, Zaccaro, S.J., Levin, K. Y., Korotkin, A.L., & Hein, M. B.(1991). Taxonomic efforts in the description of leadership behaviour: A synthesis and functional interpretation. Leadership Quarterly, 2,245-287
French,J.,& Raven,B.H.(1959). The bases of social power. InD.Cartwright(Ed.), studies of social power (pp.150-167). Ann Arbor, MI: Institute for Social Research.
Yukl, A(2002), Leadership in Organizations (International Edition, 5th Edition)
New Jersey: Prentice Hall
De Paris R.J., (1998), Situational Leadership Problem Solving Leadership for Problem Solving Policing (Access date 1 Sep 2004)
Kotter, J (1988). The leadership factor, New York: A Division of Macmillan, Inc.
March,J.G.,&Simon, H.A.(1958). Organizations. NewYork:John Wiley.
Miller, L. C., & Hustedde, R. J. (1987). Group approaches. In D.E. Johnson, L. R. Meiller, & G..F. Summers(Eds.), Needs assessment: Theory and methods. Ames: Iowa State University Press.
Meier, K. (1988). Bureaucratic leadership in public organizations. In B. Jones(Ed.), Political leadership from political science perspectives. Lawrence: University of Kansas Press.
Mintzberg, H (1983). Power in and around organizations New Jersey: Prentice Hall
Pfeffer, J. (1981). Power in organizations. Marshfield, MA: Pittman.
Pfeffer, J. (1992). Managing with power: Politics and influence in organizations.
Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
Rice, A. K. (1965). Leaning for Leadership: Interpersonal and inter group relations. London: Tavistock Publications.
Lukes, S. (1986). Power. Oxford: Basil Blackwell Ltd.
, P. (2003). Leadership: Theory and Practice London Sage Publications Ltd
Degregorio, W. (1993) The Complete Book of U.S. Presidents
New York: Random House Value.
