Leadership Final Project

Leadership Final Project

Abstract

Several scholars define leadership as the ability to influence people into achieving specific goals. Many leadership styles have emerged over time. The propounders of such theories have based their suggestions on various aspects that people have and how they translate into how they lead the people. Such models include transformational, servant, path-goal, transactional, charismatic, team, and leader-member exchange, among others. All the approaches fall under the auspices of behavioral and personality aspects. Other theories look at the political methods and concepts that a leader promotes. These include democratic, authoritarian, and laissez-faire processes. The bible also illustrates the use of some of these leadership styles in both the old and new testaments. They range from political to military leaders, conveying different styles to suit their situations. Some of the leaders had excellent guidance and followed the ways of the Lord while others got consumed by human desires and had their shortcomings.

Introduction

Merida is an elaborate text that highlights several aspects of leaders in the book of first and second kings. These range from excellent leaders who were perfect before the eyes of the Lord to the ones who started their reign well but went astray to the ones who were misleading the people from the very beginning. Despite all these, no one leader’s style was similar to another. They all had different beliefs about how to influence and run their kingdoms. As a result, several theories emerge from the text. The paper shall look into these theories and focus on three current ones that are evident in the work. These shall include an in-depth analysis of transformational, charismatic, and authoritarian leadership styles. It shall trace the same into the text and analyze the effectiveness of each. The paper shall also suggest more useful forms, for the ones that had shortcomings and also look at the same from the lens of the current century.

Current Leadership Styles from Merida

One of the leadership styles that emerge in light of the Merida texts is transformational leadership. This leadership style advocate for going against the status quo in a bid to bring about social change. Transformational leaders are inspiring and motivate their followers to share in the same dream and work towards attaining it (Ahmad, Bakhsh & Rasool, 2019). They do not have to force or lure their people with rewards and a punishment system but encourages them to reach their full potential. Such leaders are also visionary. They come up with a dream that could improve their situations and bring their people on board the same. Transformational leaders are people-oriented and focus on growing as a group. They do not look at the monetary profits of anything, or how a goal may serve their interests. Instead, their primary aim is to improve the situation of the whole mass so that they are all successful. Majeed, Jamshed, Nazri & Mustamil (2019) look at the association between transformational leadership and workplace spirituality and how emotional intelligence facilitates all these. Their study findings support the place of transformational leadership as an enhancing tool for workplace spirituality and a promoter of emotional intelligence.

The other style is charismatic leadership. These are leaders who are confident, persuasive, and have a lot of charm. They command their followers through their dominant communication styles (Shao, Feng & Wang, 2017). Such leaders are also visionary like transformational leaders and tend to lead their followers through better situations. However, unlike transformational who try to change the status quo, charismatic leaders work towards improving it. The theory primarily focuses on the personality of the leader, their ability to deal with situations, and improve things. It focuses more on the person and not the processes or procedures.  Lepine, Yiwen, Crawford & Rich (2016) carry out a study that shows how charismatic leaders influence their followers’ ability to handle stress and challenging situations; thus, improving their overall job performance. The study results showed an improvement in the followers’ reactions to hindrance appraisals and how they deal with challenge-stressors. People also applaud charismatic leaders for their appeal to their followers’ emotions and sensitivity to the environment and the needs of the people.

The third style is authoritarian or autocratic leadership. This style denotes a person’s tendency to make decisions without the input of others. Their ideas and convictions overrun everyone else’s. Such leaders also dictate the activities of the people around them. They are selfish and make decisions based on what they want without the participation of their subordinates. Wang, Cheng & Wang (2018) define it as complete and absolute authority over subordinates while demanding their unquestionable obedience. The article outlines five behaviors associated with the style, including power and control, hidden intentions, rigorousness, doctrine following, and powerful subduing. This leadership style does not work towards developing meaningful relations between the leader and subordinates. Instead, it promotes fear, anger, hate, and spite for the leader. The followers do not develop committed feelings but instead form distrust and fail to submit to the leader.

Examples of the styles in the Merida text

Transformational leadership theory is evident in the lives and reigns of such kings, such as King Asa and Jehoshaphat. Merida tackles the case of Jehoshaphat, who became king of Judah after his father, King Asa, in 1 King 22:41. Jehoshaphat ruled in Judah for 25 years. He was an outstanding leader who followed after the footsteps of his father. Merida also highlights that the Chronicler has a more elaborate account of the reign of King Jehoshaphat. However, the book of kings hails him for all his good deeds. He was faithful to the Lord and followed his commandments. He also became a king at a time when most leaders were going astray and leading the people in the wrong direction. However, he took it as his initiative to turn the people back to the worship of the Lord. Transformational leaders are visionary and work towards achieving the same through appealing to people’s values and emotions. He wanted what was suitable for the people, and that is leading an upstanding life. As a result, he resolved to better their lives.

The text also portrays a charismatic leader through the story of King Solomon. He is the first leader that the text analyses deeply. Solomon took over leadership from King David. He was a wise, diplomatic, and organized leader. Shemesh (2018) defines the character and personality of King Solomon as a judge, constructor, poet, and the most prudent of all in the Near Ancient East and Egypt. King David chose Solomon to take over the throne upon his death. Merida highlights that David gave him a spiritual charge and obey God’s word. He also gave him an administrative charge to deal with all the threats to the kingdom. Solomon was passionate about the Lord and built him a mighty temple. He wanted the best for his people and used his wisdom for their good One of the most renowned stories about Solomon’s wisdom was the story of the two mothers. Solomon was also humble before the Lord and requested for knowledge to help him rule his kingdom. Despite his fall from God’s grace, Merida shows his human nature, trying to balance his love for God and worldly pleasures.

An excellent example of an authoritarian leader from the reading is King Rehoboam. He was the son of King Solomon and one of the worst leaders that the kingdom experienced. He was also the first king of the newly split kingdom of Judah. From the instant he took office, he committed to ruling with an iron fist. His leadership went against the direction of Deuteronomy 17. He was commanding and punished the people for any mistake. He was not a forgiving leader and did not seek the people’s love or approval. Instead, he ensured that they feared him and submitted out of the same. He did not learn from his father’s mistakes. Despite the wrongs that King Solomon did, he had once been a faithful servant of the Lord. As a result, God had blessed him abundantly, including the gift of wisdom. King Rehoboam did not please the Lord. He was a selfish leader who was driven by his love for power and had less commitment to the good and welfare of his people.

Where the leaders were useful in the biblical setting

Some of the leaders that Merida highlights were effective in their leadership of the people. Others were failures and led the people away from the Lord. The first leader, Jehoshaphat, was effective in turning the people away from idol worship. He sent out religious leaders of Judah, Levites, and priests to reach every person in the kingdom. As a result, unlike most leaders of this time who had forgotten God’s good deeds, King Jehoshaphat sought to please God. He also paid attention to saving the people by appealing to their spirituality. He wanted the best for them and, therefore, took an initiative to bring them closer to God. He was, consequently, effective in reconciling the people to God.

The second leader, Solomon, also focused on his relationship with God. He loved the Lord with all his heart and did good before his eyes. He was also committed to his worship and proved this by constructing a temple for God. Solomon is well-known for his qualities, such as being a diplomat, an organizer, and an excellent administrator. Most scholars applaud his wisdom when dealing with very complicated situations. He was also a visionary leader with a lot of integrity. Some of his other qualities include ethical, loyal, driven, and also very resilient. He used all these to inform his decisions and rule, thus ensuring the thriving of his kingdom.

King Rehoboam’s rule was primarily contrary, thus had little efficiency. Merida highlighted how his reign was under a dark cloud, and over a small kingdom. King Rehoboam’s tyranny finally led to the schism of the nation. He was hard-hearted and did not consider competent counsel. Upon taking up the throne, the people pleaded for him to be fair and not make them suffer as his father did. While seeking counsel before responding, he did not consider what his elders told him but listened to his peers, who told him what he wanted to hear. He enforced fear and intimidation on the people until they deserted him, thus, proving his inefficiency.

A different leadership style that would have been more effective

The story of kings such as Rehoboam and Ahab are examples of leaders who had poor qualities, thus failure in their reign. For King Rehoboam, as expounded above, other leadership approaches could have worked better for him. Servant leadership denoted a desire to represent the interest of the people and put them above all else. Such a leader should focus on bettering the lives of their people and not attaining power. For King Rehoboam, the people had suffered at the hands of his father and needed a better king. They appealed to him to take a different course from his father. King Rehoboam should have adopted servant leadership and accepted to become aware of the needs of the people. Badger (2019) defined the theory in line with its founder’s view of making the people a priority above everything else. The work also elaborates that some of the tenets of the approach include enforcing a collaborative environment, subordinate autonomy, and ethical, and moral decision-making. As a result, King Rehoboam should have adopted servant leadership to ensure the people’s trust and remain loyal to him. This case would have led to the thriving of the kingdom under his rule.

Instances where servant leadership might work well today.

Servant leadership approach is an effective way of creating and promoting followers and other associate’s trust and commitment. The theory includes principles such as awareness, listening, empathy, and persuasion. The approach can work well in almost all settings and situations. In the service industry, or example companies in the food industry, banking, health provision, and education, the theory can prove vital. Badger (2019) looked at the case of service leadership and how it can prove critical in the law enforcement industry, especially among the officers that experience a lot of situations that can be stressful and traumatizing. The work applauds service leadership as a means of improving resilience among such officers. Lu, Zhang & Jia (2019) also show that there is a relation between servant leadership and employee’s emotional labor, thus a positive influence.

References

Ahmad, M. S., Bakhsh, K., & Rasool, S. (2019). Effect of Transformational Leadership Skills on Teachers’ Performance at Secondary School Level in Punjab. Journal of Managerial Sciences, 13(2), 1–9.

Badger, J. K. (2019). Perspective: Increasing Officer Resilience Through Servant Leadership. FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin, 1.

Lepine, M. A., Yiwen Zhang, Crawford, E. R., & Rich, B. L. (2016). Turning Their Pain to Gain: Charismatic Leader Influence on Follower Stress Appraisal and Job Performance. Academy of Management Journal, 59(3), 1036–1059. https://doiorg.ezproxy.liberty.edu/10.5465/amj.2013.0778

Lu, J., Zhang, Z., & Jia, M. (2019). Does Servant Leadership Affect Employees’ Emotional Labor? A Social Information-Processing Perspective. Journal of Business Ethics, 159(2), 507–518. https://doi-org.ezproxy.liberty.edu/10.1007/s10551-018-3816-3

Majeed, N., Jamshed, S., Nazri, M., & Mustamil, N. M. (2019). Walk the Talk: Bringing Spirituality to Workplace through Transformational Leadership and Emotional Intelligence in Higher Education Institutions. Jurnal Pengurusan, 56, 1–19.

Shao, Z., Feng, Y., & Wang, T. (2017). Charismatic leadership and tacit knowledge sharing in the context of enterprise systems learning: the mediating effect of psychological safety climate and intrinsic motivation. Behaviour & Information Technology, 36(2), 194–208. https://doi-org.ezproxy.liberty.edu/10.1080/0144929X.2016.1221461

Shemesh, A. O. (2018). ‘And God gave Solomon wisdom’: Proficiency in ornithomancy. HTS Teologiese Studies/Theological Studies, 74(1).

Wang, L., Cheng, M.-Y., & Wang, S. (2018). Carrot or Stick? The Role of In-Group/Out-Group on the Multilevel Relationship Between Authoritarian and Differential Leadership and Employee Turnover Intention. Journal of Business Ethics, 152(4), 1069–1084. https://doi-org.ezproxy.liberty.edu/10.1007/s10551-016-3299-z