House and Aditya have made a substantial case for both the achievements and the difficulties of leadership studies and noted that one of the major problems is that the “current study of leadership … continues to focus excessively on superior-subordinate relationships to the exclusion of several functions that leaders perform and to the exclusion of organizational and environmental variables that are crucial to effective leadership performance” (House and Aditya 1997, 465). They also assert that there are generic leadership functions which “represent broad classes of specific leader behaviors” (House and Aditya 1997, 449). The idea is that a generic function can be enacted by diverse behaviors in different settings, e.g., group maintenance may be seen as such a generic function which is performed by leaders in most, if not all, settings. The notion of generic functions is useful if not applied too selectively. After all, the same role may be served in different cultures by different behavior. The variety of behavior that serves the political nature of leadership will not deny the fact that a fundamental function (it may best be called a metafunction) of all leadership, regardless of setting, is to be political. Once this step is taken, it may become more possible to identify the behaviors which serve that metafunction. Successful leaders can persuade individuals about the need and advantages of authoritative change. The change cycle can, consequently, be easily completed. Maintain Discipline: The spiritual and religious dimension also constitutes an important element to consider. It is important to understand how it shapes our beliefs and values, our thought process, our self-knowledge practices, and our relationship with transcendence. Although it is a more private dimension, omitting it from the analysis implies leaving out a dimension that occupies an important part of people’s lives.

In parallel, I was fortunate to be able to work with political leaders from several Latin American countries, generally helping them on issues of strategic communication and electoral campaign management—issues that I have been working on for many years. I also looked for experiences in the business world, where there are many biographies and a large amount of content dedicated to rethinking how human capital is organized and how it is developed. It is clearly seen there how the old vertical and pyramidal corporate model is being overcome by a more horizontal and collaborative leadership. Today’s most dynamic companies invest time and resources thinking about these issues, something very difficult to find in the world of politics. Another Pandemic: A Crisis of Leadership and Representation This article takes an approach to the concept of leadership which is both heuristic and theoretic. The attempt is to identify the fundamental, generic qualities of leadership as a political process embedded within social processes. I take the elementary question of what is leadership to be a necessary predicate to any effective answer to derivative questions such as how to lead or what forms of leadership are most valuable and thus choose to concentrate on the former. Great care must be taken in this enterprise, to be sure, since attempts to comprehend leadership often run afoul of subjective biases, confused thinking, and inaccurate assumptions. Resentment and disenchantment exacerbate the problem, since many see political leaders at best as a privileged group unable to solve problems and at worst as corrupt individuals who take advantage of and abuse power. So, any remuneration is going to be too high, any leisure is going to be seen as superfluous, any weakness as inability. It is a model destined to fail because nothing good can come out of that dynamic.What I learned confirmed that there was something worth exploring further. I began to work more systematically to understand the personal and human dimensions of leadership. I was finding valuable people and tools that could be useful for other leaders who would face challenges like those I had faced. And I saw that there was a different perspective of the world of leadership to explore—different from the more rational one in which I had been trained, first as a graduate student in political science, then as a politician. That process outlined the path that led to this paper. The Personal Dimension of Politics Added to this complicated dynamic are the trappings of fame and public exposure. Being well known in a hyper-communication society like the one we live in is something that has an impact on the individual and their family. It is neither neutral nor natural. It restricts your freedom, it has an impact on the people around you, and it redefines relationships. In short, it increases loneliness and unleashes those defense mechanisms. But nobody prepares you for that. It is an omitted phenomenon, even though it would seem to be quite obvious that by dedicating oneself to politics, one ends up becoming well known. We also should rethink what tools leaders need and how to have more enduring strategies for the development of human capital. If the rest of human activities have advanced scientifically and technologically in terms of both personal care and training for high performance, we can learn a lot from them and enrich the traditional toolbox of values, integrity, ideas, and management skills. a fine analysis and a mine of information that should be in all libraries, particularly on booklists on leadership. . .’ Achieving Shared Organisational Goals: A leader's role in an organisation is to guide employees in achieving shared goals. The leader brings people and their efforts together to achieve common goals.

An expression frequently used to portray this sort of administration is "People first." Of all the leadership styles, the affiliative initiative methodology is one where the leader gets very close with individuals. A pioneer rehearsing this style focuses on and upholds the feelings of colleagues. The leaders endeavour to open up a pipeline that associates the person in question to the group. In the affiliative leadership style, the leader pays attention to the employees and supports the emotional needs of the team members. It's especially helpful, for instance, in smoothing clashes among colleagues or consoling individuals during seasons of pressure. If we do not prepare and support our leaders, we cannot expect to have good results. One must wonder why there is so much investment, technology, and science devoted to training and caring for people who are dedicated to other tasks that have much less impact on our society, but we do not do the same with the people who take on the task of political leadership. Kenneth Janda discussed the nature of the problems which occur when conventional words are taken into the specialized “vocabulary of those attempting to construct a systematic body of knowledge about social behavior” (Janda 1960, 345-47). He identified “at least two” of those problems as (1) “the delusion of sufficiency” and (2) “confusion by similarity.” The first re fers to a “premature satisfaction with the analytical utility of the concept being proposed.” The variety of meanings normally associated with a word may not account for built-in contradictions and inconsistencies, for example. In other cases the word in question might be used too hastily in a taken-for-granted manner which may not support rigorous analysis. The “delusion of sufficiency produces concepts which are not analytically tight and are therefore inadequate for exacting study” (Janda 1960, 346). The second, confusion by similarity, “relates to the entanglement of a carefully formulated concept with one or more other analytically distinct concepts that share the same label” (Janda 1960, 346). Wilson, R., and C. Rhodes. 1997. Leadership and Credibility in N-Person Coordination Games. Journal of Conflict Resolution 41(6): 767-91.The human brain uses sight as a reference to manage vital functions. When our visual field is reduced, the alert mode is activated because our ability to detect threats is reduced. On the contrary, when the visual field is widened, our breathing and heart rate decrease due to a decrease in danger. While there has been a near universal avoidance of the notion that the key to the leadership phenomenon is its fundamental political nature, the problem has been compounded by the failure of most analysts successfully to distinguish “leadership as process” from “leadership as property.” As the presumed property of those possessed of status, rank, or position, leadership is reduced to a subordinate aspect of preexisting social structures. Hence, overwhelmingly, research on leadership is conducted on the presumption that leadership is a property associated with formal position within formal organization. This is a subject that knows no age, gender, or physical condition limits. We all have a body, and it needs to be at its best to be effective in leadership. By analyzing human behavior, I understood that authentic presence is what resonates with any audience. But presence needs energy to reach that audience. We must teach leaders that we communicate not only with words but with the energy of presence, and this can be trained. The problem is that many people climb up the ladder without the proper training and mental preparation to communicate; so, they end up appearing either contracted and less than their best selves, or imitating others and seeming fake. All this sadly prevents sincere, authentic communication. 4 Of those political scientists who do study and write about leadership most are constrained by disciplinary predilection to focus on leadership as elite behavior within established institutional frameworks such as the American presidency. Few approach leadership, as I will do here, as a political process occurring within human societies at all levels and in almost all (if not all) forms of society. Many recognize that leadership often involves political characteristics, and, certainly, eminent political scientists have focused on leadership as a critical element in the success or failure of governmental office holders, party officials, and the like. Scholars in other disciplines conclude much the same thing in their studies of nongovernmental leaders, but no one has unambiguously argued, as I propose to do here, that the conceptualization of leadership may be redirected and refined with recognition that politics is the central, common element in all leadership.

Teams also show us counterexamples, where egos and individualities tolerate each other, but clearly convey that there is no such sense of shared belonging. The similarities with the realities of political forces are very clear when viewed from this lens. Both are vertical models, and if we look at the last decades in the region, we will see them competing with different levels of success depending on the country. But over time, a crisis of representation has grown in much of the continent. Societies that have radically changed the way they connect, consume, and inform themselves must choose between political leaders who continue to try to replicate outdated formulas and emerging leaders who are unprepared or opportunistic, building on people’s resentment and disenchantment. The support of doctors, nutritionists, physical trainers, kinesiologists, and other specialties is important if one wants to avoid voluntarism and wants to take advantage of scientific knowledge and advances that continue to develop. The view of political leaders taking care of their bodies becomes even more necessary when you consider that the athlete has a career limited by age, but the political leader has a much longer career. There is enormous opportunity for improvement in strengthening the entire training system, as the political experience is a longer one and therefore provides more time for learning and training. Today, we can learn from the many experiences of high-performance athletes who have prolonged their competitive lives.

Influence other people's behaviour: Leadership is the ability of a person to persuade others to behave in a certain way to achieve a common objective or goal, resulting in willing cooperation. Usage of leadership concepts which derives from the leadership desired, or the results desired, rather than from a common generic function betray a misleading normative bias. To say that leadership is manifested in a political environment may avail us of little if we then become enmired in locating the criteria for “good” leadership and “good” politics! The approach to this sort of dilemma may best begin with an acceptance of the objective coexistence of leadership and politics and work from there toward a conception that is less value-bound. Thinking about the human dimension of political leadership changes the perspective on what it means to be a leader today. It requires new insight on how this new leadership is built, how it is sustained, and how it is supported. It leads us to analyze the opportunities our democracies have to overcome their crises. The more national the figure one projects, the more their experience resembles that of the most well-known celebrities, be they artists, athletes, or other popular figures. However, there is little awareness that success in political activity will lead you to become famous, and that being famous will come with loss of freedom, impact on families and your inner circle, and constant stress caused by being seen by others.