A new perspective on leadership.

ABSTRACT

A new theory is proposed which argues that the vital elements in the making of effectiveness of leadership are (i) Commitment and (ii) Clarity of goals, both with respect to the task at hand. The extent of effectiveness depends upon the extent of these two factors--Commitment being the more dominant factor between the two. The leadership style / behaviour is only an intermediate product. The leader who is high on commitment and clarity could change from one style of leadership to another and anywhere in that continuum, depending upon the need of the task / mission and the goals and sub-goals she/he has to achieve. The effective leader/manager is effective because she/he is committed to the task and is clear about how to achieve it. The same leader/manager may not be effective in another task that does not generate Commitment and Clarity in him. Thus, leadership is task-based; it is neither 'traits-based' nor 'leadership-style' based. Also, leadership effectiveness is not always through direct interaction and therefore her/his styles and behavioural patterns; the influence on the 'influences' could more probably be an indirect process having a relationship with the factors of Commitment and Clarity of goals on the part of the leader with respect to the task at hand.

1. CHANGING NEW WORLD

Strong winds of change are sweeping over the world of business. There are two basic currents--one of technology and another of globalisation, each reinforcing the other. Technology has made globalisation possible and globalisation has made the growth and propagation of technology easier. The result has been an unprecedented connectivity between organisations and between people. The transport and movement of materials and people is quicker. The communication by voice transmission is almost instantaneous. The availability of such services is phenomenal, resulting in increased uniformity of cultures, similarity of role models and more openness of markets.

1.1 Which Type of Leadership Style is Appropriate to the New World of Business?

These, in turn have brought in remarkable changes in the way businesses are conducted worldwide. What used to be an exclusive strategy of a corporation becomes common knowledge and common practice within a very short period of time. So, the strategies and the organisational fabric have to constantly evolve and adjust to the ever-changing situation. In such a scenario, managing people becomes a crucial issue. The people of the organisation have to not only adjust to the constantly changing organisational strategies but also have to contribute to the evolution of the same. They are the creators as well as the implementers of the organisational strategies. What and how should one provide leadership to such a group of people?

2. AVAILABLE LEADERSHIP THEORIES

Leadership theories have broadly been of two kinds: (a) The innate characteristics theory and (b) the behavioural theories.

2.1 'Innate' Characteristics Theories

The proponents of 'innate' characteristics believe in the oft-heard statement 'Leaders are born'. The 'born leader' is supposed to have personal characteristics such as gallantry, dare-the-devil attitude, integrity, self-reliance, honesty, common sense (Gallup, 1987), intelligence, sensitivity, maturity, and creativity among others (Stogdill, 1948). Royals and noblemen used to be described in such characteristics in the bygone days of royalties. While these characteristics are no doubt good, we all know that not all persons possessing these traits in good measure have become the great leaders that they should have or could have been. Which means the personal or 'innate' characteristics alone cannot explain the leader-effectiveness in a satisfactory way. Perhaps, these characteristics need to be seen with respect to their 'setting'. It is also possible that the kind of personal characteristics that are usually thought of are not sufficiently all-inclusive or exhaustive.

2.2 Leadership 'Style' or Leader Behaviour Theories

Since the personal characteristics or traits could not adequately explain their effectiveness in all situations, the research on leadership effectiveness shifted to the study of the 'situation' and what the leader does when dealing with the situation. The thrust of leadership research, since the last few decades, has been on leader behaviour towards the people who need to be influenced. The conventional theories have been uni-dimensional. For instance, there are the much-regurgitated theories 'X' and 'Y'. To put it briefly, one that imposes structure and implements the pre-designed structure, and another that allows much freedom--giving importance to the relationship dimension rather than the task at hand. The Ohio State University studies classify two distinct types of leader behaviour (Kerr and Schriescheim, 1974):

a) Initiating Structure: Consisting of mainly task-oriented behaviour with little regard for personal relationships.

b) Consideration: Consisting of mainly personal relationship-oriented behaviour.

Leaders are measured on these two independent dimensions.

Similarly, Fred Fiedler's contingency theory (Fiedler, 1965 and 1967) categorises leaders as being (i) relationship oriented or (ii) task-oriented. For this classification Fiedler uses the Least Preferred Coworker (LPC) scores obtained through a questionnaire. This classification into 'Task oriented' and 'Relationship-oriented' has gained much ground.

These behavioural theories of leadership try to find a 'match' between the 'situation' and the 'leader behaviour'. For effectiveness, as per these theories, different situations call for different leadership behaviours. The theories try to find an answer to the question as to which kind of leader behaviour is particularly effective given a certain type of 'situation' or contingency. Moreover, the 'situation' could be further refined into components such as types of subordinates, degree of task structure, leader's position power, as Fielder has done.

2.2.1 Drawbacks of 'Leadership Style' Theories

In short, a manager could either belong to the 'X' style of the 'Y' style of leadership. The individual manager could also be put on the grid of 'X' and 'Y' axes. In any case, the manager is either boxed into a particular style or put on a particular (X, Y) coordinates. The particular (X, Y) coordinates of a manager are considered characteristic of that particular person. These leadership theories, therefore, are not much different from the 'traits' or 'personal characteristics' theories. The behavioural approach appears to be an extension of the earlier 'trait' theories of leadership. Moreover, these theories see the leadership styles as distinctly black and white, to the extent of defining a 'relationship-oriented' leader as one who will concern himself with the task in order to have successful interpersonal relations. This appears rather simplistic, separating the leader from mission/task accomplishment.

Several decades earlier during the heydays of manufacturing, the situation was relatively much more stable as compared to today's fast changing world of business. Strategies and policies once adopted could yield dividends for a fairly long period of time. Therefore, it was felt that the organisations needed more of implementers of the already defined task. When the 'knowledge era' arrived a decade or a little earlier, getting work done from the knowledge workers was thought to be quite a different basket of fish. The knowledge workers were supposedly averse to taking orders and therefore a more persuasive 'Y' style of manager-leader seemed preferable. In the current scenario of super-fast communications, knowledge is not only to be acquired and used appropriately, but more importantly, it is to be constantly generated. This could be called the 'era of creativity management'. What kind of a manager-leader would be needed for this situation? The manager is, in any case, either boxed into a particular style or put on a particular coordinate on the 'X' and 'Y' axes of the leadership styles. As a consequence of this 'pigeonholing', these has been a perennial question as to which style of leadership or rather which particular combination of the characteristics will be suitable to the current fast changing world of business. Which pigeon will deliver the necessary goods?

2.3 Empirical Evidence Points to Paradoxes

However, empirical evidence from the diverse fields such as business, politics and social-work shows that in the same situation, leaders with widely differing leadership styles have been equally effective. Examples for this could be found from any nation's history. The so-called 'dictatorial' and 'democratic' leaders in the area of politics have both been equally effective at the same time and on the same population.

Equally importantly, we find the same leader adopting the two radically different or opposing leadership-styles when faced with different tasks to accomplish. There are several recent examples from the world of business. For instance, Azim Premji, Chairman of Wipro--a well-known InfoTech Services company, a billionaire--just a few years ago considered the 39th richest person in the world--is at once task-oriented and human relations oriented. He places great emphasis on 'trust', building powerful networks and on 'humility'. But he is tremendously focused on the task that is to be done (Chary, 2002). Similarly, another business leader from the 'new economy', Narayana Murthy of Infosys Technologies--famous for his human relations emphasis in his company--has been quite task-focussed (Chary, 2002). Andrew Grove, the legendary Chairman, CEO and co-founder of Intel Corporation is a humble man--a man who admits to his mistakes and shares his fears about Intel and the complex world of business. He is participative so that he and all at Intel are fully aware of these vital issues. But, he could be a ruthless top manager who takes dramatic action to cut the size of the company by about one-third in terms of people in a matter of months (Morgenson, 1997). Similarly, in the case of Fred Smith the Founder and Chairman of Federal Express, there is the dichotomy almost always found in high achievers (Morgenson, 1997). He describes himself as someone who flaunts authority, yet he had served two terms of duty as a Marine in the Vietnam War. He is an excellent student and also a world-class teacher.

In the political arena, M.K. Gandhi, Mahatma to those in India, is well-known all over the world for his peaceful resistance and non-violence--person whose life came to be known as an epitome of humanitarian values and human relations orientation. In fact, Albert Einstein had once remarked: "It is hard to believe that such a man in flesh and blood exists in this world today." He was a unique leader whose life, it appears, more than politics, attracted millions of people like a giant magnet. However, if one were to look objectively, there were a numbers of instances when the Mahatma's behavioural style could not have been exactly classified under 'relationship-oriented' or 'consideration'. Netaji or Subhash Chandra, who had serious differences of opinion with Gandhi, had to quit the Indian National Congress in the late 1930's. Sir Richard Attenborough has captured this less-known aspect of Mahatma in his well-researched movie 'Gandhi', where Gandhi sternly asks his wife Kasturba to clean the toilets.

Another Indian political leader, Jawaharlal Nehru, the architect of democracy in India and a person known to respect individual freedom and viewpoints of even his opponents, was quite autocratic in many situations. Some say that because he was autocratic in many situations that India today is firmly set on the democratic path. There are many such apparent paradoxes.

2.4 Need for a Suitable Theory of Leadership

Thus, it may be necessary to refute the concept of leadership styles as being associated with an individual. One is not, so to say, endowed with certain leadership style or a particular mix of the leadership styles. There is, therefore, a need for a theory that would take cognisance of the following:

1. Effectiveness of a person as a leader cannot be explained adequately by his 'traits' or personal characteristics.

2. Effective leaders have been 'X' type as well as 'Y' type in varying amounts from time to time and even at the same time as per the different requirements of the task to be accomplished. Therefore, it is inappropriate to categorise people into two coordinates of the 'X' and 'Y' dimension without reference to the task or mission at hand.

3. The leader behaviour is dynamic in nature, involving continuous flexibility in adapting itself according to the mission/tasks to be accomplished at different times.

4. The leader effectiveness has to be sourced to neither the innate 'traits' nor to his particular 'X, Y' coordinates of leadership style, but to other factors that are found to be in a greater measure when a leader achieves any task.

3. A NOVEL THEORY OF LEADERSHIP

A theoretical model suitable to the above requirements was proposed earlier in an abridged fashion (Chary, 1990). The same is presented below in more detail with several examples taken from recent business leadership, among others. It has much relevance in today's fast-changing world of business.

This novel theory states that:

Leader effectiveness with reference to a mission/task only depends upon two characteristics or factors:

a The commitment of the leader to the task at hand and

b The clarity of his vision about that task.

The 'effectiveness' of a leader is a resultant of these two factors present in the leader for the task at hand.

[FIGURE 1 OMITTED]

3.1.1 The Two Vital Factors: 'Commitment' and 'Clarity'

Commitment is the force or the flow of energy that comes through inspiration, through a resolve to getting the job done--no matter what. It manifests in many ways: as drive, as steadfastness and courage against stiff opposition, as tolerance and openness to various views and issues regarding the task and as flexibility of approach to deal with various and varying aspects, alignments, orientations and scenarios regarding the task over a period of time. The essence of Commitment is the force of the resolve to 'come what may', getting the task done.

Clarity is the clarity in vision regarding the scope of the task to be done and the various elements that should go into it. The goals should be clear. The clarity is regarding the final goal and not so much regarding the methodology or process to achieve the goal. The process at any point should be clear but the entire road map need not be. Because, the road map might change; the leader may decide to take a different road depending upon the environment and other circumstances. However, the final goal or task to be achieved should be clear in his mind. What that goal means and what its ramifications are should be clear. In fact, he is the initiator, narrator and painter of the goal (Chary, 2002).

This theory, which is different from the usually accepted leadership theories, postulates that two characteristics--leader's Commitment and his Clarity as regards the task at hand are the only two important elements that determine the leader's effectiveness. A high level of Commitment and a high level of Clarity will make the leader highly effective. Leader effectiveness is a function of these two elements. These two elements, as said before, are with respect to the particular task at hand.

3.2 Effective Leader Adjusts his Style/Behaviour

Therefore, depending upon the task at hand the effective leader will adjust his leadership style/leadership coordinates. The very same individual could be a tremendous taskmaster as well as a very friendly human relations person. Different tasks would require different ways of handling people at different points in time. A good leader, i.e., an effective leader generates that flexibility at an adequate level because of his/her high level of commitment to the task at hand. It does not have to do with his innate traits or characteristics.

3.2.1 There is Nothing Like an 'X' or 'Y' Type of Leader

The conceptual model, presented herein, means to convey that there is nothing like an 'X' type leader versus a 'Y' type of a leader or a particular 'percentage mix' as characterising a leader. The only characteristics that are important are: the Commitment of the leader to the task at hand and the Clarity of his vision about the same task. The 'effectiveness' of a leader is a resultant of these two factors present in the leader for the task at hand. These two characteristics are not mutually opposing like the earlier definitions of 'X' and 'Y'. They are mutually independent. For the highly effective delivery of the task at hand, both the characteristics need to be high.

3.2.2 Examples in Support of Commitment and Clarity

According to this novel theory presented, the 'X' and 'Y' type styles of leadership are only a part of the process of achieving the task/results. If one believed merely in the 'X' and 'Y' classification of leaders, Sir Winston Churchill would appear like a paradox. Apart from being a 'super general' he was a very effective persuader of people--British, as well as American and the Free French. His commitment was strong; his perception of the mission or objective was very clear. The letter he wrote to President Roosevelt brings out these essential elements. Churchill wrote: 'If, as I believe, you are convinced Mr. President, that the defeat of the Nazi and Fascist tyranny is a matter of high consequence to the people of the United States and to the Western Hemisphere, you will regard this letter not as an appeal for aid, but as a statement of the minimum action necessary to achieve our common purpose (Churchill, 1973)'. The letter had its desired impact and was instrumental in changing the course of the war and the destiny of the two countries and also of the world at large. Sir Winston was an effective persuader of people = small and big, common men and the great people. It will, therefore, be foolhardy to put such a person in one mould--as either task-oriented or as a relationship-oriented leader. The polarity, the dichotomy, the assumption of static behavioural styles fades away when one considers such examples. Leader behaviour is one of continuous adaptation.

Fred Smith, Founder and CEO of Federal Express Corporation (FedEx) has been quoted as saying, 'They (the entrepreneurs) have to decide that this is the thing that they want to do with their time and their life more than any other thing. It takes almost a zeal try to get most important ideas from the incubation stage to a level of sustainable success. Somebody who wants to be an (successful) entrepreneur has to cross that bridge first and foremost. And that is much more important than a lot of the mechanistic things that the entrepreneur has to do. They have to really soul search and say, 'Am I totally committed to working these seven-day-a-week, month-after-month work sessions to get this idea to success?' And that's not for everybody (Morgenson, 1997).' Commitment is the most important factor for success. Once that is there in good measure, the process will fall in place. Fred Smith's statement seems to strongly support such a theory.

For the great leaders, the commitment is strong, the inspiration is tremendous and the vision of their goal is clear. Late Dhirubhai Ambani, the founder of Reliance Industries--the corporate giant with the largest investment and the largest sales per annum in India--started his business in Bombay in 1958 as a trader in Nylon, Rayon and spices with a 'care of' telephone. His vision even in those days had been to establish a very large petrochemical complex. He followed his vision undaunted by various hurdles, the socialistic pattern of economy being one of the toughest stumbling blocks. What he exhibited were the qualities of Clarity of vision of his goal and of high degree of Commitment towards the same.

Pleasant Rowland, Founder and President of Pleasant Company, had no experience in Toy business. But she built up a large $ 250 million worth mail-order business of books and dolls. She had this 'mission' right from the beginning. Before starting the business, when she spoke about this to a businessman known to her, he rebuked her saying, 'Pleasant, it sounds like you want to start General Motors'. But as Pleasant Rowland says she had this "real passion". 'It is important to have this passion' according to her, because most people starting businesses don't have the wherewithal to go up against the giants (Morgenson, 1997)'.

3.2.3 Commitment Bordering on 'Mission'

For these business leaders, what they have achieved is not 'business' but a 'mission'. They take huge pride in having made a difference to the people and to the society at large. As Pleasant says, 'If the competition can match us, then the world is better for having more good stuff for girls (Morgenson, 1997)'.

Similarly, Dr. Verghese Kurien the originator of the highly successful 'Operation Milk Flood'--a huge Milk Cooperative venture in India--goes beyond the survival and growth of his organisation Amul (Anand Milk Union Limited) and says, 'Let there be 1000 Anands. There are a lot of Kuriens.' The organisation takes on the shape of a movement, for him. Reliance Industries Chairman Mukesh Ambani, often keeps repeating, 'Reliance can do it. India can do it' (Chary, 2002). This shows these extra-ordinary business leaders' total commitment to the success of the mission. The success of the organisation is an automatic by-product. And, even before they had begun on their mission, they had a clear vision of the mission they wanted to achieve. The road maps may not have been clear. As the things presented, on their way to their mission, they dealt with these; they did not know what might come up on the way, but they were committed to deal with 'come what may'. In accomplishing his mission of a 'White Revolution', Dr. Kurien takes on the role of a mentor, a teacher. 'We are training sixty Kuriens every year', he proudly claims (Chary, 2002).

Another phenomenal leader in the area of Computer Software business, Narayana Murthy who built Infosys into a billion dollar business has his official designation itself as 'Chairman and Mentor'. What kind of a leader is a 'Mentor'? He has to have a clear sight of his goal and an unmatched commitment to deal with dynamic, unpredictable, unplannable problems/obstacles/issues that might come up on the way.

3.2.4 Mission-orientation Removes Dichotomy in Leadership Styles

In such a leader's task-orientation, his followers will see relationship-orientation--their well being. They see the 'trust'. Because, there is no 'ego', no self-interest, no self-aggrandisement. The organisation culture is nothing but a group of individuals 'aligned' to the purpose/goals. The 'alignment' becomes the organisation's culture. They align because of the clarity of vision of the goal and because of the strong commitment of their leader. Murthy is at once a task-master and a relationships-person. About the task, he is very focussed and expects his colleagues at all levels to be similarly focused. But, he is tremendously interested in 'creativity' and no one knows better than him that creativity can come about only in a 'free' atmosphere, an atmosphere where each respects the other. In Narayana Murthy's Infosys Technologies, there is tremendous focus on learning, learnability and creativity. In Azim Premji's Wipro, another huge Computer Software Company, his emphasis is on 'Applying Thought', which is Wipro's mantra for success. Premji has always had his sights clear. There is also tremendous focus on getting the job clone--the way it should be done. But this task-orientation is hugely tempered by an aspect that is dear to Premji--'Humility'. 'If you have the humility, you can have an open mind to learn from the environment, respect and learn from the other individuals and to absorb changes.' 'Trust forms the essence of all relationships. It builds a powerful network', he says (Chary, 2002). There cannot be any better vindication of the importance of relationships in an organisation, from a highly successful business leader who is steadfast in his task-focus/mission to be accomplished.

3.2.5 Universality of this Novel Leadership Theory

Therefore, for the new post-knowledge management economy, we need not invent a different 'style' of management. In fact, for any type of economy, at any point in time, all that is needed for a high level of effectiveness are a good level of the factors of Commitment and Clarity about the task that needs to be done. So, despite all the uncertainties of the present era, all that the organisations would need are people who have a clear vision and who are highly committed to the task's happening. Let us call this novel theory as the "C-factors theory" (after the factors of Commitment and Clarity).

3.3 More on this "C-factors theory"

The model presented in Fig.1 shows that the Leader's behaviour/style depends upon (i) the task at hand, (ii) the levels of commitment and clarity of vision of the leader, (iii) the subordinates' characteristics, commitment, clarity and alignment with the goal and (iv) the work environment and social environment prevailing in the organisation or other medium in which the leader and the subordinates operate. There are continual feedbacks and, therefore, the model is dynamic. The dynamism has its source in the clarity of vision and commitment of the leader. Speeds of feedback and flexibilities are more with increased levels of the two factors of 'clarity' and 'commitment'. The effectiveness of the leader is consequently more. The leader's influence is (a) by direct mode and (b) by indirect mode.

[FIGURE 1 OMITTED]

3.3.1 Commitment is the More Critical Factor

While both clarity of goals/vision and commitment have to be high in order to produce high levels of leader effectiveness, the latter--Commitment--seems to be a more critical factor. Gandhi the Indian freedom fighter had the clarity of vision of a new, free India. Many others shared the same vision at around the same time. But, Gandhi got his global point of view across to villagers, who never thought beyond their villages. He made them think of freedom when the White man was God. The difference between his level of commitment and that of the other leaders was obvious in the conference of the Indian National Congress Party he attended for the first time after his return to India from South Africa.

Mukesh Ambani, Chairman of Reliance Industries says, 'What is really involved in execution (of a project/programme) is commitment, although people in general lay a lot of emphasis on planning. Ambani is so committed to his goal that he is ready to transfer/share the ownership of the commitment. For transferring that 'ownership', he builds 'trust'. Empowerment comes through trust. Committed leaders produce several other committed leaders towards the goal (Chary, 2002). They are like a Banyan tree that gives rise to several offshoots. Commitment seems to have effect in geometric proportions.

This is not to decry the role played by goal 'Clarity'. A highly committed leader towards a goal that is not clear to him can guarantee high levels of commitments in his followers. But that cannot be sustained for any long period of time. There are many terrorist outfits claiming to be freedom fighters. Now, these may be high on commitment, but these are low on the 'clarity' of goals. So, the impact is high initially but diminishes rapidly due to insufficient follower orientation. The Fig. 2 presents a 3-D diagram on leadership effectiveness. It depicts that increasing Commitment gives rise to more Effectiveness; however, proportionate increase in goal Clarity, while maintaining the same Commitment, may not produce the same level of enhancement in Effectiveness. Commitment is postulated to be the more critical dimension of the two.

[FIGURE 2 OMITTED]

3.3.2 Examples from the Field of Politics

To give an example: During World War II, Sir Winston Churchill had many potentially disastrous military strategies/tactics in his mind. Some of his dealings with the military chiefs were awkward as he tried to put such ideas into action. Yet, the very same military chiefs and the public in Britain overlooked all these faults and followed him in his 'central' task. Commitment thus appears to be a more critical dimension as compared to Clarity.

Similarly, now some people may question the decision of the Chinese Chairman Mao Zhedong to undertake the 'Long March', which resulted in unspeakable hardships and casualties to the followers (Han Suyin, 1972). But even today, in these changed circumstances, the Long March is hailed as one of the greatest events in Chinese history due to the tremendous commitment, which it has come to symbolize. President Nasser of Egypt committed a blunder and had much remorse for the same. But, the Egyptians still (or all the more) revered their leader.

The analysis in all these cases is that the followers 'saw' the Commitment of the leader; perhaps, the Commitment was all the more evident in these cases. People are willing to forgive or make allowances for some lapses in the Clarity of perception (of approaches to goals) provided the leader is high on Commitment. Commitment, is, therefore, postulated to be a more critical variable than Clarity of goals.

3.3.3 Relationship between Clarity and Commitment

Given a certain level of Commitment, the relationship between Clarity and Effectiveness would be expected to follow an S-shaped curve as shown in Fig. 3.

[FIGURE 3 OMITTED]

The relationship between Commitment and Effectiveness (given a level of Clarity) can also be expected to be S-shaped. However with high levels of Commitment there is expected to be a significant Effectiveness level even where the Clarity is rather low. Fig. 4 depicts the expected response. The case of low clarity of goals is particularly noteworthy. As said before, Commitment is expected to be the more critical variable than the Clarity of Goals (compare Figures # 3 and 4).

[FIGURE 4 OMITTED]

The first inflection point, that is the threshold value, will be larger for lower values of the other variable. The case of the relation between Effectiveness and Clarity is shown in Fig.# 5 below, in order to explain this shift in the inflection point. Smaller threshold values of Goal-Clarity are required as we go from lower values of commitment to higher levels of Commitment because there is better feedback.

[FIGURE 5 OMITTED]

3.3.4 Dynamic Nature of Response

However, one of the very important points to be noted is that the response to the two characteristics (Commitment and Clarity) is not static. The entire process is dynamic with multiple feedbacks (cyclical process) between the followers and the leader as the proposed general model (Fig. # 1) had depicted. The time dimension is, therefore, quite important; the response is over a time period; the follower-characteristics and leader-behaviour are changing--both due to each other. Therefore, the Figures 5 and 6 are both dynamic. The figures, as they were presented, assumed a fixed follower "state". However, this "state" and the leader's response are changing over time. The diagram given below (Fig.# 6) illustrates this expected relationship.

[FIGURE 6 OMITTED]

Again, the maximum levels of effectiveness, the inflection points of the relationships, the speed of response with respect to time, all these depend to some extent on the Environment factor and its impedance.

The consideration of these factors should not in any manner dilute the importance of the two characteristics of C-factors--Commitment and (goal-) Clarity--which are the very source of Leader Effectiveness. The other factors are incidental on them and provide the medium through which the effectiveness is to be achieved.

4. CONCLUSION

A Leader's effectiveness depends upon the two factors of his clarity of vision of the goal and his commitment towards that goal/task. Leadership styles or behaviours are his responses towards the achievement of his committed goal. These responses would, therefore, be variable. It will not be appropriate, hence, to ask as to what kind/style of leadership will be required for today's rapidly changing world of business. For any world--old or new--old economy or new economy, the business leaders' effectiveness depends only on these two factors which have little to do with 'recent'-ness or 'new'-ness or the change in the nature of the economy. In today's knowledge economy and in tomorrow's 'creativity' economy, it is not going to be any different, as that business leader will be effective whose clarity of vision/goals is high and whose commitment towards the goal is high.

REFERENCES

Chary, S.N., Business Gurus Speak, Macmillan, New Delhi, 2002.

Chary, S.N., "New Concepts in Leadership Effectiveness", Leadership & Organization Development_ Journal, Vol. 11, No. 2, 1990, centre section 'Upfront', i-iii.

Churchill, W., The Second World War, Vol. 1, Readers' Union, 1973 and as quoted in Thompson,

R.W., Generalissimo Churchill, Hoder and Stoughton, London, 1973.

Gallup, G. Jr. and Gallup A., "What Successful Have in Common?", Readers' Diqest, Nov. 1987, 76-78.

Fiedler, F.E.,"The Contingency Model: A Theory of Leadership Effectiveness", in Proshansky, H. and Seidenberg B. (editors), Basic Studies in Social Psi, Holt, New York, 1965.

Han, Suyin, The Morning, Jonathan Cape Ltd., London, 1972.

Morgenson, G., Forbes Great Minds of Business John Wile4y & Sons, New York, 1997.

Stogdill, R.M., "Personal Factors Associated with Leadership", Journal of Pschology, Vol. 25, 1948, 35-71.

Author Profile:

Professor S. N. Chary is currently a consultant to Chetana Educational Trust, Davangere, Karnataka, India. He earned his both MS in Engineering (1971) and MBA (1972) at University of Rhode Island. He was a Professor at the Indian Institute of Management Bangalore where he taught for more than 25 years. He has done several nationally important management consultancy projects. As a management consultant to the Government of India, he had been instrumental in recommending a reorganisation of the Department of Telecommunications and designing an HRM package for the staff of more than 300,000 nationwide. He has also been a manpower planning and assessment consultant to the government and to the process industries. Prof. Chary is an author of several books on Management and is currently writing a book of fiction.