”
4. There can be no universal definition of leadership as long as different countries retain their unique characteristics. In discussing this statement compare and contrast two different approaches to leadership eg Australian and Chinese.
Suggested approach:
a) Consider common / modern leadership theories and the purpose of a leader:
a. Scholars including Schermerhorn Davison Poole Simon Woods & Chau (2011) assert that the nature of leadership is the process of stimulating enthusiasm and directing effort towards defined organisational goals. Schermerhorn et al. (2011) further state that effective leaders need to consider the various needs of the environment and subordinates in which they lead. Tools and models including emotional intelligence employee empowerment or even Kotters change model can be employed to respond to the social forces present within the environment. Barker (2001) asserts leadership as being the process of responding to chaotic energy and facilitating change whereas management is the function of maintaining stability.
b) Consider and argue that that the definition in the purpose of a leader can be a universal among cultures however the way that a leader practically applies leadership in their roles differs as do the tools in which they deploy.
a. as such the practical application of the leadership definition cannot be universal:
i. The deployed techniques and tools (e.g. how does emotional intelligence get deployed in Australia vs China?) must consider the environment and culture in which they operate.
ii. Expand on cultural environmental and social differences between Australia and China.
1. Refer to Leadership in western and Asian countries: Commonalities and differences in effective leadership processes across cultures.
Do you want your assignment written by the best essay experts? Click order now and enjoy an amazing discount.”
