In the first 2012 Presidential Debate, Obama v. Romney, Obama said something very distinct about leadership. In his rebuttal to Romney’s plan for his term in office, he stated that a leader is is someone who is able to make plans and have ideas. Although this isn’t the exact quote, Obama was right. Being able to lead requires that the leader has an idea about what he wants to do. A leader is able to “look into the future” and plan accordingly to what he will need to do in order to satisfy a goal. However, to be President it is necessary to have a strategically style of leadership.
In class last Wednesday we were having a discussion about the difference among leaders. There are some who strategically plan out every step and others who plan along the way. In certain situations, both leaders’ approaches would be challenged. For example in the case that someone is required to plan out a party on so and so date and make sure everything for the party will be provided, a strategic style of leadership might be needed. Even to be President, a strategic leader would be more effective than a pacing leader. But what if the situation were different? Instead of a party or presidency, what if you were in a situation such as solving a puzzle. A pacing leader in this case, would be much more effective than a strategic leader. A pacing leader would be able to take each step diligently and figure out what needs to be solved in order to get to the next step. A strategic leader would see the end mark and not take into account the possibility of mistakes that could he could make along the way. A strategic leader is not as a flexible in situations as a pacing leader is.
Different situations call for different kinds of leaders. Don’t get me wrong, a strategic leader may also very well plan for problems along the way, but thinking about what problems may come Is not as effective as knowing what problems are already there. Both styles of leading are great and have the possibility of satisfying goals. However, each type works best in certain situations.
What are your views on leadership categories? And how do you think it ties into being an effective leader?
October 9th, 2012 at 4:50 pm
Funmi,
I totally agree with your idea about how different situations call for different kinds of leaders. There are so many different kinds of leadership which we have just begun to discuss in our leadership class. This form of reasoning in much more encouraging in contrast with a more narrow-minded way of thinking. I like that you view the idea of leadership from a broad perspective. This is an important way of thinking with the upcoming presidential debate and election, in terms of analyzing the present situation America faces in terms of economic difficulties, the war, etc. and which form of leadership is most applicable and efficient to our current situation.
October 9th, 2012 at 10:45 pm
Funster (my roomie)-
Amen sister, amen! I think your insight is wonderful about the difference between an active and passive leadership style. This even reminds me of my blog, and I like the fact we thought on the same wavelength. I really appreciated how you coordinated a strategic leader with a “pacing.” Also, the background info with the trending topic of the Presidential Debate was a great way to tie-in the strategic leadership topic with something current and relatable.
October 10th, 2012 at 3:30 pm
I think the most effective leaders are people who can switch between these two styles! Who among us hasn’t had a leader who stuck to a plan even when things were obviously needing a change or who refused to make a plan even when things were chaotic? An effective leader, I think, is one that can use both methods of leadership and, perhaps even more importantly, recognize when one is needed rather than the other.