How leadership skills and decision making reflects the presidents personality - Essay Example

?I. Introduction The main topic of this study is “How Leadership Skills and Decision Making Reflects the President’s Personality?” This research is on the aspects of leadership and decision making skills that a leader should have. It will provide insights on the various definitions of leadership and the skill that a person must possess in order to be considered a wise leader. Subsequent discussions will likewise detail strategies on making good decisions that are based on policies and regulations. Both these aspects will be taken jointly to evaluate the qualities of executive heads, which will be the basis for the feasible comparison of the personalities of Presidents Lyndon B. Johnson and Richard M. Nixon. The topic is important because the success of a government requires a president who has good leadership abilities at the helm of governance. However in order to be a wise leader, having the skills to lead others also necessitates having the ability to make sound decisions that will not only benefit a few important individuals but will also serve to the advantage of the masses. In view of these, the main body of the paper will contain the methodology that will describe the manner used to gather information about the topic. This will be followed by the literature review on leadership and decision making; and then the discussion which will provide details on how leadership skills and decision making policies reveals the personality of leaders either political or executives of organizations; and an overview that would compare the leadership skills and decision making strategies as well as the personalities of Presidents Lyndon Johnson and Richard Nixon. I. Main Body II.1. Methodology The method of research utilized for this study is the qualitative research where both the verification analysis and the evaluative analysis were made use of. In the verification analysis, assumptions, theories and generalizations about leadership and decision making were confirmed; while the evaluative analysis regarding policies, practices and improvement of instructional practices about the topic to be concluded. II.2. Literature Review on Leadership and Decision Making Dess et al (2010: 379) pointed out that “leadership is the process of transforming organizations from what they are to what the leader would have them become.” This implies that leadership has its own setbacks. The reason behind this is that a leader who may have visions for what an organization will become might not be in tandem with the visions of his or her followers. Although in some instances, the visions or objectives may be the same, but the method or means on how to implement existing policies and regulations to achieve the goals may require different opinions not only from the direct players but also from various interest groups; who have personal interests in the outcome of the whole organization. By the same token, Gutierrez et al (1997: 49) stated that wise leadership implies having the ability to do what an individual sets out to do combine with the spirit to carry on until the task set has been accomplished. Leaders in this instance must not just be result oriented but must have the proper motivation to go on despite unforeseen problems and criticisms. As mentioned earlier, people within a given organization or governments have different opinions on how a goal must be achieved or accomplished. This requires the leader’s ability to draw final and absolute decisions based on different facts and information given. While not everybody may approve of the decision that was made in behalf of a particular issue, the important thing is that the leader has the guts to make ultimate decisions despite criticisms from all levels. In addition, a leader must know his or her own strengths, which includes being aware of his or her own extent of knowledge and capabilities. This also includes having the trust and confidence of others, especially the followers who will evaluate whether the leader is successful and thriving in his/her endeavors or not (Big Dog and Little Dog’s Performance Juxtaposition, 2010: n.p.). In such situations, leaders must know the different methods of approaches in relation to dealing with followers and any problems which usually arise unexpectedly. This implies that having the ability and personality to gain cooperation and win loyalty is insufficient to become a good leader. Because having the loyalty and cooperation of others necessitates the acquisition of skills that can equally direct and manage the efforts of others. In connection to this, there are three major style of leadership as follows: 1) authoritarian leadership, 2) participative leadership, and 3) delegative leadership (Cherry, n.d.:n.p.). Authoritarian leadership which is commonly called autocratic leadership shows a clear distinction between the leader and the follower. The distinction comes in the form of making decisions where the autocratic leader makes his or her decisions autonomously. Most of the decisions made by an autocratic leader have been reached without requesting any contribution from the other members of the decision making team. Since it is the leader who usually decides what must be done and how it should be done, the authoritarian system does not provide others the opportunity to voice out any opinion. As a result, this type of leadership controls the decision making process of a group rendering the leader as the most authoritative figure within the team (Cherry, n.d.: n.p.). The second style of leadership is the participative leadership or democratic leadership. This is considered the best style among the three types of leadership since the leader usually defers to the group and is a team player. The decision making process within the participative leadership style encourages all group members to contribute their ideas, thereby enhancing their self-esteem so they can participate actively (Cherry, n.d.: n.p.). Aside from being given the chance to partake in the decision-making process, the democratic leader does not leave his team members to discuss things aimlessly. He or she provides appropriate guidance that would steer the entire group into the right direction in order to accomplish the objective (Cherry, n.d.: n.p.). The third style of leadership is the delegative leadership or laissez-faire leadership, which is regarded as the least effective style of leadership, because the leader becomes negligent by expecting the team members to come up with final decisions regarding most issues and concerns. A delegative leader does not properly guide his or her team members that often leads to a lack of enthusiasm on the part of the members and having undefined roles within the team (cherry, n.d.: n.p.). Leadership according to Frances (2005: n.d.) is: “Providing the capable oversight, guidance and governance necessary to direct a group of people in the successful attainment of a shared vision.” This definition is in agreement with the previous definitions of leadership since it states that a leader must be adequately competent to direct and control his team to accomplish premeditated goals as one unit that moves in a single direction. Although many unforeseen obstacles may impede the direction the team is taking, the leader must never loose sight of his or her goal because such motivation is vital to the operation’s success. When leaders fail to pursue the direction that must be taken, followers normally loose faith not really in the organization as a whole but in the ability of the leader to take control of the situation and persevere in the appropriate route to effectively accomplish predetermined goals and objectives (Frances 2005: n.d.). The study done by FEMA (2005: 20) describes decision making as a means or way of selecting applicable solutions in solving problems. The study further revealed the problem-solving model that has five main steps as follows: 1) identify the problem; 2) explore alternatives; 3) select an alternative; 4) implement the solution; and 5) evaluate the situation (FEMA 2005: 104). Problem identification calls for being aware of an abnormal situation that must be critically evaluated as to who are the people involved and the potential risks at hand. Then all alternatives are considered and the best one that is least risky is considered to neutralize the problem. When a solution or answer has been selected, the plan must be implemented after necessary resources and goals have been properly identified. Once the solution (alternative) has been administered, follow-ups must be done so results can be suitably evaluated (FEMA 2005: 104). The general factors that generally influence decision making are: political factors, safety factors, financial factors, environmental factors and ethical factors (FEMA 2005: 104). The concept of success in decision making relies on the quality of decision and the efficiency of its implementation (Knowledge@Emory, n.d.: n.p.). A quality decision entails the process of properly selecting a course of action that will facilitate the accomplishment of objectives competently in comparison to other alternative solutions that were simultaneously considered. It needs a capable leader who can steer clear of interrelated issues like conflicts of personality including political and social stress to implement a solution which was deemed appropriate for the current issue being tackled. In addition, the majority consensus is needed in order to implement an alternative or a solution to the problem at hand. It is significant to consider that consensus does not mean complete satisfaction with some followers and other stakeholders whose perception and means of action differ significantly. As such, it is up to the leader to explain the justification behind the final decision and to convince his or her constituents to actively participate in the implementation of the resolution. Cooperation must be emphasized because teamwork requires the effort and skill of all concerned (Knowledge@Emory, n.d.: n.p.). II.3. Discussion – Comparing the Leadership Skills and Decision Making Strategies of President Lyndon B. Johnson and President Richard M. Nixon Considering the styles of leadership that were pointed out in the preceding paragraph, President Lyndon Johnson’s leadership style falls more within the category of the participative or democratic leadership style because he involves all concerned to do their part in order to make the entire government system work. This was depicted when he lobbied and supported for the passage of the civil rights bill among others where he encourage consensus between different groups in society. Although it can be said that his approach in obtaining the decisions he deems correct is a bit extreme, he usually has the knack of getting his way along with the support of his followers. Moreover he assumes command and responsibility when a critical issue like the Vietnam War was laid before his feet. Viewed by many as a political leader who is quite adept with foreign relations, President Richard Nixon on the other hand, possesses an authoritarian leadership style. Although President Nixon ranks as one of the best president the United States ever had, he is often perceived as cold and aloof by his contemporaries and subordinates. The reason behind this may be is that he is able to function exceptionally well when making critical decisions alone without the necessary input of others whom he does not trust. In displaying such behavior, President Nixon’s leadership style coincides with the description of an autocratic leadership. His distrusts of others imply that he believes he can do things better all by himself; and is not bothered about what people might think or say about him as long as he is able to come up with a satisfactory solution that can alleviate an important political issue foreign or otherwise. II.4. Discussion – Leadership Skills and Decision Making Policies in Relation to the Personality of a Leader In general, the decision making process is affected by various factors that are directly related to the decision maker. Hence, the policy maker’s decision or action is usually affected by the “type of political organization, the decision making systems, and the forms of strategy that policy makers use in determining policy (Statements Made on the Diane Rehm Show, WAMU, FM Radio, n.d.: n.p.).” Basically, this implies that a politician’s behavior is influenced by the structure of the current government setting that mainly involves the personal traits of the individual. This is the reason why people react differently to the same problem because the constant factor is for the most part is the setting or the environment, while the character traits or the personality of each individual largely varies. Hence, the ultimate decision rests more with the principles of the individual and how he or she perceives the set of guidelines and regulations that must be followed. As mentioned in the previous paragraph, the success of a leader depends upon how his followers and other stakeholders perceive his or her achievements. This goes to say that without the support of the people, a political leader’s inclination to accomplish objectives for the public will not materialize. In reality, the mass populace have their own personal dilemmas that they must contend with everyday. Consequently, the people basically have no time and in-depth knowledge to form certain biased positions on any political issues (Edwards et al, 2008: n.p.). However, the large part of the mass majority’s opinion matter greatly for a political leader, especially the president since this is where he or she will have to base some decisions about certain matters that would necessitate consideration of the ability to satisfy the wants and needs of the people (Edwards et al, 2008: n.p.). Relatively, the public expectations from a president requires a myriad of policies that will give them the guarantee of having an adequate and stable economy that is firmly rooted in being able to provide peace and security aside from being expected to be ethical in most political and social dealings. Once the president or any political leader has been able to meet the expectation of his or her constituents, public approval is eminent. Such approval is technically needed for the leader to enjoy public support. Although in most political circumstances, the public’s support is unpredictable and constantly changes overtime; these changes are sometimes in relation to issues that demand appropriate decision making policies and the leader’s personality in handling critical issues (Edwards et al, 2008: n.p.). The performance of political leaders like the president can be traced back to the individual’s inherent characteristics, which includes his or her perception of the world and attitude in dealing with everyday responsibilities (President Overview, n.d.: n.p.). An individual’s perception or view of the world varies considerably on how he or she looks at human nature and present moral issues. Accordingly, the main frame of a person’s character is based on his or her formative years in childhood, because this is the stage where principles and attitudes are fully inculcated within the mind. Whereas the current emotions of the individual, like whether he feels good or bad about his or her current situation only comes in second (President Overview, n.d.: n.p.). It is interesting to note that a person’s personality is based on a combination of dimensions. These dimensions generate the four basic kinds of characters an individual may possess. These dimensions are: active-positive, active-negative, passive-positive, and passive-negative (The Expanding Presidency, n.d.:n.p.). Individuals who fall within the active-positive category are mostly enthusiastic and energetic people who get the job done. People who have active-negative personalities are often described as aggressive types who are compulsive. In most situations, people with the active-negative character possess a stubborn demeanor that usually leads to devastating outcomes. On the other hand, persons with a passive-positive personality usually seek emotional support like love, which they generally obtain because they often give their consent and collaborate with others. The passive-positive types are not assertive and could easily be manipulated; hence they have lesser accomplishment in comparison to the other types of personalities that were mentioned. Last but not the least is the passive-negative personality that primarily portrayed by those individuals who do not have sufficient confidence in their abilities. These types generally make-up for their low self-esteem by being dedicated to their responsibilities but considerably does little and often covers their ineptness by often being righteous and stressing indistinct values (The Expanding Presidency, n.d.:n.p.). Considering the preceding discussions on the relation between leadership and decision making polices to the highest ranking leader of the nation, it is fitting to state that presidents have their own exclusive operating approach and character traits that sum up their very own personality. The personality of a president is his or her customary trade mark of getting things done in the office and of carrying out tasks in relation to politics. No two presidents have the same personality; they may be similar in some aspects but generally the various factors that affect their decision making policies vary greatly. Researchers commented that there are more than four types of personalities and categorizing each president within the abovementioned categories of personality is difficult since factors like beliefs and circumstances affect decision making processes (The Expanding Presidency, n.d.:n.p.). This includes the effect of the influences other people have on the general outcome of an issue that may concern them considerably than others. II.5. Discussion – Comparing the Personalities of President Lyndon B. Johnson and President Richard M. Nixon Lyndon B. Johnson or LBJ served as the 36th President of the United States. He was portrayed as “the President who helped the poor find their own way” and “the President who helped end hatred among his fellowmen and who promoted love among the peoples of all races, all religions and all parties (The New York Times, 2011: n.p.).” This description was given to Lyndon Johnson because it was during his term in office that the Civil Rights Act of 1964 became law. Moreover, his Great Society reforms paved way to the long-term transformation for education, social welfare and medical care for the elderly (The New York Times, 2011: n.p.). President Johnson was said to be a man of significant authority during his years as a majority leader. To get his way, he would normally used tactics like sweet-talking his opponent and disagrees vehemently in order to convince and accomplish his objectives. His most remarkable feat was in the passing of the civil rights bill where he had to stand up against an allay and incorporate deception in order to get the bill through and be elected to the Presidency (Abramson, 2002: 1). Lyndon Johnson’s personality and public image according to the review made by Abramson (2002: 1) was “an incredible blend of badgering, cajolery, reminders of past favours, promises of future favours, predictions of gloom if something doesn’t happen. When that man started to work on you, all of a sudden, you just felt that you were standing under a waterfall and the stuff was pouring on you.” Aside from being good at convincing others to see things his way as stated in the preceding sentence; President Lyndon Johnson was a big bear of a man who at 6 ft. and 4 inches towers above most of his peers in the political arena. He managed to uses both of these traits to his advantage both politically and personally. So if he would be categorized according to the four types of personalities that were previously mentioned in this study, his personality would likely fall within the parameters of the active-positive kind. Although his means may be considered underhanded, his show of energy and determination to accomplish results definitely makes a go-getter and an achiever in his chosen field of endeavor. Like his previous contemporaries, President Richard M. Nixon, the 37th president of the United States is considered by most as another great American President. President Nixon held political office at the Federal level longer than any known American politician where he appeared on the Republican Party’s presidential ticket five times; has been nominated by the Republican Party for president three times; has been elected as vice-president and president twice (Nixon Presidential Library and Museum, n.d.: n.p.). Richard Nixon was said to have held conservative political views. This observation was mainly due to President Nixon’s public persona, where most described him looking uncomfortable and reserved. Such conclusions were drawn possibly because of his tendency to be very proper in all aspects and are quite detached with the people around him (Nixon Presidential Library and Museum, n.d.: n.p.). President Richard Nixon was likewise said to be better alone with his thoughts since he usually imagine the most evil in others and brings out the worst in them. But in a more concrete appraisal of President Nixon, despite his attitude of not caring what others may think of him had a practical approach in dealing with China and the Soviet Union. His realistic approach in terms of addressing foreign policies was considered brilliant and effective. The tactics and strategies he employed in such matters eventually put an end to the Vietnam War – one of the most devastating war that the United States engaged in due to the large number of lives lost on both sides (Nixon Presidential Library and Museum, n.d.; n.p.). Taking all the details about President Nixon as a whole, his personality can be considered as the active-negative type since he possesses a rigid or inflexible attitude which pertains to having a negative perception of others. This particular attitude of President Nixon conforms to the stereotype personality of active-negative individuals whose stubbornness in some aspects are the causes of the individual’s downfall and often lead to disastrous results. Lyndon Johnson and Richard Nixon have contrasting personalities that depicts their way of handling themselves as political leaders. Lyndon Johnson was energetic and tends to incorporate all the people around him in his agenda in order to achieve the results he deems are appropriate for the issues he faced during his time in office. While Richard Nixon was more aloof and tend to tackle all problems alone. He has a way of trying to portray himself as a strong kind of individual who can function and achieve things alone without the help of others. His views that others may not be as good as they seem did not diminish until his political term came to an end. While the personalities of presidents play a great role in their undertakings, it is vital to remember that all situations and issues need solutions that require the process of making decisions. For this reason, a final resolution to any form of dilemma is better than not having made any decision at all. Consequently, decisions normally have ramifications that cannot be eliminated, which goes to prove that nothing is perfect. Therefore it is unwise to expect perfection from anybody including the President of the United States (Mindszenthy et al, n.d.: n.p.). III. Conclusion Executive leadership is the galvanizing factor and element which integrates the different interest in any type of organization bringing harmonious, inspired and smooth functioning unity. Leadership is a psychological process that provides guidance through personality, character, intelligence, and other intangible characteristics. The leaders, supervisors or heads whether at the top or slightly lower levels of political or organizational management should have the proper attributes of a leader. This is in addition to the technical competence required by the nature of his or her position. Accordingly, a leader should have: 1. Physical and mental health – this mean the leader must have strength, vitality and endurance required to physical take on the responsibilities of being a head or leader; 2. Intellect – leaders must have clear thinking and intelligence that is either judicial or creative. Having a creative mind means being able to envision new concepts or new plans. Having a judicial mind on the other hand requires a keen mind that can rapidly evaluate various aspects of an issue and can readily arrive at the most appropriate decision required. The leader must have good judgment, should be receptive of other’s opinions, and must have a reasonable perception and a high sense of values. His or her intellect must allow him or her to have wide breadth of interest and aptitudes making him/her flexible in the adaptation of new concepts and ideas. 3. Personality – the leader in all sense must be mature and socially oriented. His or her personality must be able to command consent, cooperation, enthusiasm, the ability to inspire, persuade and become tactful when the situation demands it. 4. Character – a good leader must have integrity and ethical traits that earn him or her proper respect from his or her followers or constituents. While it cannot be demanded of a leader to be biased with certain moral views, it is his or her duty as the leader to show the right example that can be followed by others. As such the leader cannot impose opinions and must not be critical of the ideas of others. 5. Approachable - Leaders must not only know how to do the job that is expected of them but must also know how to be open and how to talk with all kinds of people who come from the different levels of society. He or she must have the innate ability communicate with everybody and must learn to adjust his or her status unobtrusively without calling attention to the fact of his or her own standing in the society. Leadership skills entail the utilization of one’s own unique way of dealing with people. The issue of having to interact with a lot of other personalities who in one way or another usually affects and influences the character of the leader. The so call close advisers or the top aides normally holds a certain percentage of sway on how a leader, or to be more definite, how a president handles himself or herself in public and in office. Most of the time, the desire to please others a cloud correct judgment on certain issues and draws a fire of criticisms from all parts of the society. An intelligent leader will more or less try to listen to such condemnations and will either have to stand by the decision or rectify it accordingly. Regrettably, some decisions are made based on preset rules and laws that are considered and cannot actually be made on a case-to-case scenario. While some say that a president’s decision making policy is mainly due to his or her personal ideology, it is safe to state that the final outcome of decision making procedures stemmed from various factors that were considered while alternative solutions were being regarded as possibilities. Therefore, although Presidents of the United States stands as figures of authority and unity, most in their terms as the executive head of the land have made substantial decisions that are not merely based on what they personally believe in but what they thought must be the best decision at that time they were pressed to make judgments. Hence, the President’s office has evolved overtime making it the place where great minds of great men held the reins of power. References Abramson, J. 2002. Books of the Times; A Soaring Johnson, Ruthless and Crude, but Compassionate, viewed 14 April 2011, . Big Dog and Little Dog Performance Juxtaposition. 2010. Definition of Leadership, viewed 13 April 2011, < http://www.nwlink.com/~donclark/leader/leadcon.html>. Cherry, K. n.d. Lewin’s Leadership Styles, viewed 20 April 2011, Read More