Leadership- Definitions of Leadership

Observing People

The reading on cohesion and development was one that I found very insightful and interesting as I felt like it related greatly to me this week. I felt the idea of unity and cohesion to be especially apparent and noticeable as I went to my new classes- some which I had friends in and some which I did not know a soul. As I sat looking around I noticed how people tend to cluster together and tend to group with those they already knew or were in organizations together (athletics, sororities/fraternities, clubs, etc) rather than breaking off from their posse or group to meet new people. As I read this article I found it interesting how unity and cohesion are influenced by the rule of attraction and how each individual is attracted to a certain type of group or team. Although I believe that people are more than capable to be self-reliant and independent it seems that through the observations I made in each class that people tend to prefer to be with other individuals they know and have things in common with and have mutual and common interests aside from the class they attend together.  Another interesting observation I saw that paralleled the reading of Ethics and Leadership Effectiveness was the way in which groups are structured. This was especially noticeable when you detected or found the "leader" of the posse or group that led the followers or non-leaders who were their friends. It seemed that the "followers" would do as the leader would say and sit where they wanted and organize themselves as the leader pleased... but if the leader was not there to delegate it seemed that the others seemed more insecure and unsure with which actions to take... and this made me think of Hitler on a much smaller and miniature scale. I mean, Hitler was known to delegate and to almost quasi-brainwash his followers into doing whatever he wanted.. a similarity to these people who it appeared had no ideas on their own and seemed lost without someone delegating and telling them what to do. And although this was in no way a replica or a true comparison to Hitler's ways (especially when considering there being no ethical or extreme consequences from being dominated/bossed around) I found the interrelationships of human beings to be peculiar especially when taking into consideration that there seems to always be a natural leader and natural followers in every group you see. However, although you always tend to see those who are inclined to be the dominant of the bunch, the most interesting thing to notice is what distinguishes and differentiates those who are simply bossy (and appear to be leaders) from those who really are ones. Now, at first when thinking about this it seems that friendships really are not divided into leaders and followers but just those who make decisions and those who agree to following them or going along with them. However, the way I think leaders are truly developed and seen are in the way they lead, what cause they are aiming for and the qualities they possess (other than having a good control of a group). And from thinking about it I felt that is seems that most teachers, presidents, government positions and law enforcement have these raw qualities of leadership that are so needed in order to have a prosperous and structured society. I think that unless the intention is good and the purpose of being a leader is a positive one that is intended to help those leaded, then that makes a good leader. If not the case however, I feel that this is where you draw the line between who is a good leader and who just wants to be a dictator.