Northouse defines leadership as; “a process whereby an individual influences a group of individuals to achieve a common goal”
The Oxford dictionary defines a process as a series of actions or steps taken in order to achieve a particular end. This describes exactly what leadership is. It is the deliberate effort by the leader to takes steps and actions in order to influence those he/she leads to a particular end. As asserted by Northouse, the idea of leadership cannot be divorced from being a process. Northouse states that leadership is a transactional event which means it also involves reciprocity between the leader and the followers. The idea is that the process of influence by the leaders demands a response and reaction from the followers towards how well the leader is doing in his influence. The result of this transaction is the effective achievement of a common goal. So as a result, if the common goal is not achieved effectively, then there is a flaw in the process.
According to the Dictionary, Influence is defined as the capacity to have an effect on the character, development, or behavior of someone or something. Embedded in Leadership therefore is the ability to influence a person or people by affecting them. I however also believe that influence is a virtue everyone has either or not they are in leadership. I coined a saying which goes like; “Both the Pope and the Pauper have one thing in common, that is Influence.” The Pope has influence on the largest religious group in the world and the Pauper has influence upon himself. Influencing self well is a catalyst to influencing others well.
According to Northouse, groups are the context I which leadership takes place. He says that leadership is about influencing a group of people who are engaged in a common goal or purpose. I however believe that leadership can be exercised with or without groups. Like I stated earlier, I also believe in self-Leadership. The ability to influence self is a form of leadership. Groups offer a good space to exercise influence and achieve a common goal but I don’t entirely believe that only in groups can leadership be seen.
Northouse defines power as the capacity or potential to influence. Position power and personal power are the two major kinds of power according to Northouse the former being the influence capacity a leader derives from having a higher status than the followers and the latter is influence a leader derived from being seen by followers as likeable and knowledgeable. The issue of Power and leadership has always given a somewhat sour taste in my mouth because my experience of power has often been positional power. I have witnessed leaders abuse their followers either intentionally or not simply because of the positions they wield. The idea of personal power is liberating because it balances power and leadership. It is possible to have power and not use power to subjugate those you lead but influence them positively and win their hearts from a good personality.
Northouse says that Leadership includes the attainment of goals. He asserts that leadership is about directing a group of people toward the accomplishment of a task and that leaders direct their energies and the energies of their followers to the achievement of something together. I agree with Northouse, I believe all leadership should be goal driven. Without a goal to achieve, leadership is useless.
The question I would like to close with is;
Northouse asserts that groups are the context where leadership takes place, how would we then describe the process through which someone individually influences self to attain a certain goal?