ing agendas so that new priorities get . . . attention . . . being visible when things are going awry, and invisible when they are working well . . . building a loyal team at the top that speaks . . . with one voice . . . listening carefully . . . speaking with
encouragement, and reinforcing words with . . . beingtough when necessary . . . the occasional naked use of power or the 'subtle accumulation of nuances, a hundred things done a little better.
Actually, leadership is probably a little bit of each of the above definitions, and probably a little bit of some other definitions of the concept. Leadership is, most probably, a little bit art, a little bit science, and, as is true with most aspects of human life, a whole lot of drugery, frustration, and boredom. It may also, when practiced effectively, be quite satisfying.
Decision making in organizations has been described as a process of behavior with the economic model (or total ration ality) at one extreme, and with the social model (or complete 3irrationality) at the other extreme (Kimberly, and Rottman, 1987). This description implies that only irrational decision making accords human values precedence over economic values. In the organizational environments of the late 1980s, leaders must find some middle ground between these extremes, for it is evident that neither set of values can be ignored. In man
...