Power and Leadership

I. Power A. Definition According to Morhead and Griffin, power is the potential ability of a person or group to exercise control over another person or group. One of the important issues discussed by the authors is the interpretation of power in terms of potential; sometimes just having the potential is enough to influence other people under certain circumstances. It is also explained how power may reside in each individual, as a result, it is possible to establish a relationship between power and influence (385). Another author, Dorothy Emmet, gives a multiple definition of power. First she explains power as a “causal efficacy”, which can be a change observed in the physical world, or psychological pressure or manipulation, giving people reasons for choosing one alternative over another. Second, she views power as a “creative energy”, which manifested in the creation of art, ideas, discoveries, and inventions, and will stimulate creative work and effort in other people. Third, she explains power as a “personal influence” that will give strength to the character, prestige, or charismatic qualities. Fourth, Emmet defines ritual power, which will be a “causal efficacy in the magical sense” that institutionalizes charismatic power, a way of expressing and canalizing corporate sentiment. Fifth, legal power is explained, being understood as the legal capacity of a person or agent, of an institution to take certain actions (88-89). For this study power is defined as the capacity of individuals to influence and exercise control over others’ opinions or behaviors.

B. Types of Power These are classified by the bases of power, and into positional or personal power. 1. Bases of power John R.P. French, Jr, and Bertram Raven, in their study " The Basis of Social Power", identified five major types of power: reward power, coercive power, legitimate power, referent power, and expert power. a. Reward power is the "power to bestow recognition (tangible or psychological) upon followers.” b. Coercive power is the "power to obtain compliance through fear of punishment or sanctions.” c. Legitimate power is the "power based on formal position and authority in an organization.” d. Referent power is the "power based on the follower's personal liking or admiration of the leader.” e. Expert power " is obtained through the exercise of specialized skills and knowledge” (262-268). 2. Positional and Personal Power In keeping with Moorhead and Griffin, another way to classify power is into Positional or Personal Power. a. Positional Power resides in the position, regardless of who holds it, to include legitimate, reward, and coercive power. Examples of these three types of power would be on the first place, a supervisor, who has the

2

power of making decisions based on his/her position. At the same time the position of that supervisor allows him/her to reward his/her employees for his/her performance. Finally, that supervisor has the power of punishing his/her employees based on the definition of his/her position. b. Personal Power resides in the person, regardless of the position being filled, to include in this classification, expert and referent power. Examples of these two powers will be, on the first place, when employee in a company without being supervisor could be seen as a source of expert power, when he/she possess skills that are needed by others. Referent power is that one that is (finish example) (387). 3. Power and its Consequences Power can be classified according to its consequences. In agreement with Kenneth Boulding there are three major categories: Destructive Power, Productive Power, and Integrative Power. In consonance with Boulding, Destructive Power can be explained as a two-force power that could be positive or negative. The author claims, destruction could be used in a productive way for humanity. When using dynamite, bulldozers, to build dams, hospitals, humanity is getting benefits from it. Though, it is important to be conscious that positive destructive power can have some type of consequences such as destroying natural reservoirs for building a dam, among others. Productive Power, in line with Boulding, is found in creation, ideas, “in the tools and machines that make things.”

3

Finally, Integrative Power, as Boulding explains, is the capacity of bringing people together, create organizations, groups, and inspire others. But at the same time, says Boulding, this power could be used in a negative way by creating enemies or alienating people (23-25).

4

II. Leadership

A. Types 1. Transactional Leadership According to Burns, “transactional leadership is based on bureaucratic authority and legitimacy within the organization. Transactional leaders emphasize work standards, assignments, and task-oriented goals. In addition, transactional leaders tend to focus on task completion and employee compliance, and these leaders rely quite heavily on organizational rewards and punishments to influence employee performance” (qtd. in Tracey and Hinkin 2). Den Harton, Van Muijen, and Koopman confirm that leadership has been understood as a transactional or cost-benefit exchange process as previously proposed by Bass. The authors note how the relationship established between leaders and followers are based on a series of exchanges. They also suggest how the behavior of the leaders will clarify what is expected from the subordinates, and what they will get in return as compensation (2). 2. Transformational Leadership Moorhead and Griffin define Transformational Leadership as the set of abilities that allow the leader to recognize the need for change, to create a vision to guide that change, and to execute the change effectively. Only a leader with tremendous influence can hope to perform these functions successfully (381). In line with Burns, Transformational Leadership is “a process that

5

motivates followers by appealing to higher ideals and moral values. Transformational leaders must be able to define and articulate a vision for their organizations, and the followers must accept the credibility of the leader” (qtd. in Tracey and Hinkin 2). Den Hartog, Van Muijen, and Koopman think that the transformational leader inspires followers to do more and to become emotionally attached to him/her by showing strong personal identification, sharing a vision, or going beyond the expected requirements (2). The interpretation of leadership in this paper is going to be from the perspective of Transformational Leadership.

A. Dimensions Bass and Avolio proposed that transformational leadership is comprised of dimensions: idealized influence, inspirational motivation, intellectual stimulation, and individualized consideration. Idealized influence is described as a behavior that results in follower admiration, respect and trust. Idealized influence involves risk sharing on the part of leaders, a consideration of follower’s needs over personal needs, and ethical and moral conduct. The second dimension, inspirational motivation, is defined as behavior that provides meaning and challenge to the follower’s work. It includes behaviors that articulate clear expectations and demonstrate commitment to overall organizational goals. In addition, team spirit is aroused through enthusiasm and

6

optimism. The third dimension is intellectual stimulation. Leaders who demonstrate this type of transformational leadership solicit new ideas and creative problem solutions from their followers, and encourage novel and new approaches for performing work. The fourth dimension is individualized consideration. This is reflected by leaders who listen attentively and pay special attention to follower achievement and growth needs (qtd. in Tracey and Hinkin 2). Yusuf Ahmed explains that the foundations of transformational leadership are charisma, inspiration, individualized consideration, and intellectual stimulation (4).

B. Leadership and Credibility In accordance with Bornstein and Smith, followers will make conscious and unconscious evaluations of the potential leader. In consequence, they will only keep to that leader they consider to be credible. Credibility, in line with the authors, is based on six criteria that are called the Six C's of Leadership Credibility: a. conviction (passion and commitment the person demonstrates toward his or her vision); b. character (permanent demonstration of integrity, honesty, respect, and trust); c. care (concern for the personal and professional well being of others);

7

d. courage (willingness to stand up for one's beliefs, challenge others, admit mistakes, and change one's own behavior when necessary); e. composure (consistent display of appropriate emotional reactions, particularly in tough or crisis situations); f. competence (proficiency in hard skills, such as technical, functional, and context expertise skills, and soft skills, such as interpersonal, team, communication, and organizational skills). The degree to which leaders are seen as credible is the degree to which potential followers will allow themselves to be influenced (283-284).

C. Characteristics of Leaders As reported by Schein, the characteristics of leaders should be: a. extraordinary levels of perception and insight into the realities of the world and into themselves; b. extraordinary levels of motivation to enable them to go through the inevitable pain of learning and change, especially in a world with looser boundaries, in which loyalties become more difficult to define; c. the emotional strength to manage their own and others' anxiety as learning and change become more and more a way of life; d. new skills in analyzing cultural assumptions, identifying functional and dysfunctional assumptions, and evolving processes that enlarge the culture by building on its strengths and functional

8

elements; e. the willingness and ability to involve others and elicit their participation, when tasks become too complex and information too widely distributed for leaders to solve problems on their own f. the willingness and ability to share power and control according to people's knowledge and skills, to permit and encourage leadership throughout the organization (67-68).

D. Causes for leadership In agreement with John W. Work, there are two general causes for leadership. The first one, named perceived-inequity, arises from the perception differences among groups in different settings. The second cause, named the search-for-excellence, develops from managers or organizational heads, among others, which perceive the need for improving an organization's level of efficiency, productivity and profitability. It also can develop from a managerleader having a vision of the organization's mission in the future (74-75).

9

10

III. Historic and Business Figures as examples of Power and Leadership A. Interactions between Power and Leadership There are three possible major combinations that can emerge from the interaction of Power and Leadership. •

Individuals with Power and Leadership characteristics.

•

Individuals with Power and no Leadership characteristics.

•

Individuals with no Power and Leadership characteristics. In order to understand these transactions better a triangle of Power and

Leadership has been designed by the writer of this study. Leadership

P o w e r It has been written in this paper how power can be classified in two types, positional or personal. Applying this division to the previously mentioned combinations the following number of alternatives can be suggested. •

Individuals with Personal and Positional Power, and Leadership characteristics. This would be the ideal combination and in theory the most beneficial type of transaction for the person embracing this two characteristics. 11

•

Individuals with Personal Power and Leadership characteristics, lacking of Positional Power. People in this condition would strive for reaching positional power. In this case individuals may accomplish many goals, but not as many as they could if they held positional power.

•

Individuals with Positional Power, lacking of Personal Power and Leadership characteristic. In this case the individual’s position gave him/her the power, but he/she is lacking of leader characteristics. From this transaction failure could be one of the results.

B. Differences and Similarities between Power and Leadership. After reading the theory of Power and Leadership, it was necessary to establish the differences and similarities between these two concepts. First Power has been defined in this paper as the potential ability to exercise control; on the contrary, leadership has been defined as the ability to influence people. Second, Power is not necessarily used to pursue a vision; in contrast, Leadership is the use of personal abilities and qualities to pursue a vision. Third, Power could involve individuals by separately, while leadership would involve groups. Fourth, the existence of credibility is essential for the substance of leadership; however, credibility is not always linked with power. Fifth, a link can be established between leadership and personal power; yet leadership seems to be a broader concept for explaining “personal influence”.

12

C. Historic and Business Figures 1. Power/Leadership a. Margaret Thatcher Michael Genovese explains how in the middle of 1970’s Britain was experiencing difficult economic and politic times, and the country was perceived as an “ungovernable”, in consequence economic indicators such as inflation, economic growth, employment, were showing negative signals. This was the country Margaret Thatcher received when she became Britain’s Prime Minister. But Margaret’s last name was not always Thatcher. She was the daughter of Alfred Roberts a man that marked her life. He taught Margaret Roberts to win, to have work ethic, and to be willing to succeed. Alfred gave her two important lessons for life. The first one was: “You must make your own decisions. You don’t do something because your friends are doing it. You do it because you think is the best thing to do.” The second lesson was: “Don’t follow the crowd; don’t be afraid of being different. You decide what you ought to do, and if necessary you lead the crowd. But you never just follow” (qtd. in Genovese 181). During college time Margaret Roberts became member of Oxford University Conservative Association. In 1949, at the age of 24, she was elected as candidate for the Conservative Party in Dartford. During her political campaign Margaret met Denis Thatcher, her future husband. In 1951, they were married and with the pass of two years she gave birth to her twins Carol and Mark (Genovese 182-183).

13

Margaret started to feel tired and unfulfilled with her home life, and decided to fight for a seat in the Parliament. Thatcher’s political view was to eliminate from Britain the power of the state, the centralization of authority, and the socialist order. Genovese writes, “as Margaret Thatcher prepared herself for the exercise of power, she seemed quite ready to lead” (185). In 1975 Thatcher defeated her opponent 130 to 119, becoming the leader of the Conservative Party. Although in the 1979 election the Conservative’s won a majority of 43 seats and Margaret Thatcher was pronounced Prime Minister, she was not having control over the party she was representing. Thatcher was a different type of British political leader. She was a bold, innovative, ideological leader, a populist radical who relied on a strong sense of self, a warrior image, self confidence, determination, and conviction (…) she had a strong sense of moral rigidity and mission (…) Thatcher was generally more ambitious, more of a centralizer, more autocratic, less collegial, more confrontational, and more ideological than her predecessors” (Genovese 197-198). It can be inferred from Thatcher’s life that she was a woman with Power and with characteristics of Leader. Her position as Prime Minister gave her Positional Power. Her name is associated with a period of time “Thatcherism”, becoming a figure that holds Personal Power. Margaret showed characteristics of leader through her entire life. She was a motivated woman, with skills, following a vision, and she had enough credibility to be elected three times as Prime

14

Minister. She had the ideal combination of Power and Leadership to engage and achieve major challenges.

b. Golda Meir Golda Meir was born in Russia in May 1898. Two major issues drove her life. The first was her sense of Jewish identity; the second, her commitment to public service, political life, and her gender. Her conviction of public service was so elevated, that most of her difficult moments were the result of choosing it over her private life (Thompson 135). As reported by Thompson, she moved to America when she was eight years old, became an outstanding elementary school student, and began to be involved in politics. Three of the characteristics of Golda Meir were her identification with the rectification of wrong, her focus on fundraising, and her ability to persuade and organize. In 1917, explains the author, she married Morris Myerson and become actively involved in the Zionist movement. From this moment Golda started to develop her political career. In 1921, she left for Palestine, leaving behind her life in the US. To be Jewish is to be a Zionist and to be a Zionist is to participate in the creation of the Jewish State in Palestine. It was the sense of identity and purpose that gave meaning and direction to her life and career, and she clung to it even at the cost of physical emotional distress (Thompson 138). The author explains how Golda was admired for her sincerity, her

15

identification with communal and collective life, her capacity to solve problems, her determination, and her ability to speak to large groups and meet with common people (138-139). Thompson describes how the years from 1923 to 1928 represented a period of poverty and isolation. During this time she gave birth to two children and accepted to live away from the Kibbutz in order to avoid problems with her husband. The author explains the separation of Golda from her husband Morris Meyerson, being one of the reasons Morris’ expectations of a more traditional role and behavior from his wife, a person that was deeply committed with a public life (140-141). In 1928 she got a position as secretary of the Woman’s Labor Council of the Histadrut. This position made her go back to her ideals, the birth of the Jewish State and the creation of a new society. She succeeded at this position and gained reputation, due to the institution’s need of her skills. According to Thompson, she was concentrating more on practical issues, she was representing her organization, and was traveling abroad as a representative of Jews in Palestine (142). At the same time Golda was taking part in the formation of the Mapai Political Party. Her political career continued with a series of designations. First she was elected head of the Political Bureau of the Jewish Agency in Jerusalem, then she was named Minister of Labor, and in 1965 Foreign Minister. She was well known for her confrontational style, her willingness to establish better relations with third world countries, and her firm position when dealing with the

16

arab-israeli conflict (Thompson 142-146). According to Thompson, Golda decided to retire when she turned 70 from the political arena. But this didn’t last longer, in 1970, Levi Eshkol Israel’s Prime Minister suffered a fatal heart attack. Golda became again Prime Minister. In 1975, Golda announced her definitely retirement from Politics. She died three years later of Leukemia (147-150). As Margaret Thatcher, Golda Meir played a critical role in the political life of the Jewish State. She demonstrated characteristics of Leadership and Power. She dedicated her entire life to pursue her vision, her dream: the birth of the Jewish State and the creation of a new society. Her conviction, and character were two of the drivers that helped her to successfully survive politics.

C. Simon Bolivar Simon Bolivar was born in Caracas-Venezuela on July 24th 1783. He grew up in a period where revolutions and reforms were taking place all over the world in the form of international alliances, political innovation, or military glory. In more than a way Simon Bolivar grew to represent the ideals and trends of this era (Johnson 9). According to Johnson, Bolivar concentrated his efforts in pursuing his dream of liberty and many found in his figure the inspiration, becoming “El Libertador” -The Liberator (11). Johnson confirms the perception of Simon Bolivar as a leader, an individual with special characteristics and many talents that liberated Bolivia,

17

Colombia, Ecuador, Peru, and Venezuela from Spain. “Bolivar was a changemarker. By keeping faith with his ideals and exhibiting rare qualities of leadership, he ultimately moved his people to want freedom” (12). Some of the characteristics that can be accounted as part of Bolivar’s personality are his generosity (he donated all his fortune to the liberation cause), his trust in men and in personal creative action (the loyalty shown by his subordinates and their commitment to the liberation cause), his courage, and his ability to work, fight, and communicate with all types of men (Johnson 12-14). His personal charm disarmed his critics. His readiness to attempt the heroic, inspired men to subordinate their conduct to the welfare of the cause. A consummate orator, actor, and writer, Bolivar was able to divert inspiration and heroism to wherever it was most urgently required: on the battlefield or in the halls of Congress, to a Constitution, a treaty, or a battle plan (Johnson 14). Simon Bolivar was a figure that possessed the Positional and Personal Power, combined with characteristics of Leadership. This ideal mix allowed him to liberate five countries from Spain, and to commit thousands of people to his cause. He had the skills, the preparation, the vision, the resources, and the power, to start and convince others to fight for a shared cause.

Power/ No Leadership a. Jefferson Davis

18

Jefferson Davis was born on June 3rd 1808 in Kentucky, US. He came from a family where military service and patriotism were highly valued. Davis entered the Military Academy of West Point in New York, where he hold a good academic record but his resistance to attend church and avoid prohibited taverns, had an impact on his class position (Gale Research-Discovering US History 2). Davis enjoyed military life and soon was promoted to first lieutenant. According to the author, his military career showed him “the habit of command and the responsibility of authority” (Gale Research- Discovering US History 2). In 1832 Davis meet Sallie Knox Taylor. Jefferson carries a difficult courtship since Sallie’s father didn’t want for his daughter a husband related with the military career. In 1835 Davis resigned from the army with the idea of a promising civil career and decided to marry Sallie Knox Taylor. But Sallie dyed three months later from Malaria (Gale Research- Discovering US History 2). According to the author, this was a devastating time for Davis, but in 1845 Jefferson married Varina Howell. From the six children they had only two survived the couple. After a few years and putting effort into a Plantation, Davis decided to enter the political arena, winning in 1845 a seat in the congress (Gale Research-Discovering US History 3). In 1846 claims the author, Davis resigned his position in the Congress and was elected colonel. He was known as a “strict disciplinarian who tolerated no plundering in Mexico” (3). Davis became a hero during this period, and was

19

appointed as senator in 1847. He was elected for the rest of the term remaining in 1848 and reelected in 1850. Davis always hoped for a military career and when he thought he could be elected to command the newly formed military Confederate States of America, he was elected President of the Provisional Government in 1861. According to the author, “Davis demonstrated a marked inability to deal with many basic needs. He did not inspire politicians, or the people, to set aside parochial interests until independence was achieved; he was not able to bring together all the limited resources of the embattled country; slaves were not effectively used by the Confederacy; and financial instability and the lack of such basics as food caused great suffering (…) In military affairs, the president’s competence did not live up to his expectations. His insistence on protocol and his inability to see errors led him astray” (Gale Research-Discovering US History 5). After the war he was considered a conspirator in the assassination of Lincoln. He was indicted for treason in 1866. His wife raised funds for a $100,000 bail and a “writ of habeas corpus” was entered. On December 6 1889 he died in New Orleans, Lousiana. Jefferson Davis was a figure with Positional Power, but no characteristics of Leadership. At the same time he lacked of Personal Power. He possessed skills, he was inspired by military life, but he didn’t hold any of the characteristics of Leaders. Jefferson was not fighting for a vision, motivating others, or sharing his power. Davis just desired a military career and he reflected this aspiration in his personality and actions.

20

b. Isabel Peron According to Sara Weir, on 1974 Isabel Peron became the first woman to achieve presidential power in America, after being elected Vice-President nine moths before. She was the widow of Juan Domingo Peron. Her year and a half presidency were a catastrophe. Finally she was removed by military forces form her position. She was lacked the charisma and leadership qualities of Eva Peron. “Isabelita, the understudy, lacked Evita’s brains, charisma and raw, driving energy” (161-164). She was born in 1931, in la Rioja-Argentina. Although there is not much written information about her past, there wasn’t found any information of her interest for politics. In 1961 she married Juan Domingo Peron in Madrid in a secret ceremony (Weir 164). She was qualified as incompetent and not a unifying force, her performance as president has been seen as poor, and has even been held responsible for the disappearance of more than six thousand Argentineans (Weir 164,166,172,173). Isabel Peron is one of the best examples of a figure with Positional Power, but lacking of Leadership characteristics, and no Personal Power. She didn’t have the skills, the vision, the willingness to involve others, and these factors were reflected in her presidency. c. Corazon Aquino Maria Corazon Simulong Cojuangco was borne in 1933. She was raised in an well-educated and wealthy family. She married Benigno Aquino in 1954,

21

when both were 21 years old. She dedicated the first years of her married life to raise their children (Col 21-22). According to Col, in 1986 after her husband’s assassination, Aquino assumes the presidency of Philippine, developing a soft presidential style that was criticized by many (14). Although Aquino quickly became the symbol of the struggle, no one in those early days thought of her as a potential leader. Nor did she envisioned such a role for herself. She was never the political neophyte that some of the pros took her for- at their peril. However, she lacked such leadership qualities as experience, ambition, and confidence, which other opposition personalities possessed in excess (qtd. in Col 20). With the pass of time she gained experience and became more comfortable with her position. Her main goal was to revenge the death of her husband, and to save her country from the men that did it (21). But comments started to shadow her presidential period. People started to notice she was more concentrated in fighting “the dictator”, instead of be working and developing plans for the people of Philippines. Due to her lack of skills, her programmed plan of action failed. Corazon Aquino a woman with the legal power, but lacking the skills and the character needed to be a leader. One of the reasons for her failure was the absence of vision. Apparently, her only goal was to revenge the death of her

22

husband. After the death of “the dictator” responsible for it, Aquino was left with no plans or reasons to keep governing.

d. Benazir Bhutto According to Nancy Anderson, Benazir Bhutto was born in Pakistan in 1953. She graduated from Harvard University as cum laude in 1973. Even though she was a woman, her parents raised her in a relatively free environment. Benazir’s father was executed by General Mohammed Zia, when she was 25 years old (Anderson 41,44,46). In 1986 Benazir went back to Pakistan and decided to run for Prime Minister defying her father’s executor. She knew a lot of her popularity came from her father’s sad ending and it was her strategy to emphasize her role as the daughter of the martyr (52). Benazir Bhutto received a series of critics related with the way she conducted herself. She was seen as arrogant and as a person that didn’t take criticism. She was accused of not having an agenda, and that her only goal was to fight Zia, the murdered of her father, by transforming it as a cause of the people. However, it is important to point out that Bhutto was pursuing power in a Muslim country, where the role of women is diminished (Anderson53-54). She was dedicated to her cause and government, but she was inexperience, and she was not able to gain the sympathy of the military sector of her country, after Zias death. After becoming Prime Minister she made promises

23

to the people, she was not able to keep. She was accused of nepotism and seen as an ineffective, weak, arrogant, and inexperienced leader (Anderson 59,61). Despite the fact Benazir Bhutto was a Prime Minister in a Muslim country, she didn’t have the characteristics of a leader. She had the Positional Power, but missing the necessary skills, character, and vision made her failed in her journey. As Aquino, Bhutto was basing her plans in making a personal revenge a national plan, and didn’t work to have a vision that embraced the majority of the people of her country.

2. No Power / Leadership a. Jane Addams She was born in 1860 in Cedarville, Illinois and was the daughter of John Huy Addams. A man that implanted on Jane the ideas of democracy, equality, and equal opportunity (Gale Research-Discovering US History). According to the “Hanbook of American Women’s History”, Jane Addams was “a pioneer in the settlement house movement, social worker, and peace advocate, was among America’s most influential reformers” (8). In 1889 she founded her Hull House settlement in Chicago, which major role was to serve the poor people of the neighborhood and also served as a center for social reforms. Addams was decided to challenge the traditional role of women. Educated women became the target of Addams, who trhough her writing and speaking, encouraged them to quit their domestic duties and started to be involved with

24

social activism. After a while Addams reunited around the Hull House many reformers, the majority women, who felt identify with her ideas and moral issues. They became leaders of national campaigns for protective labor legislation for women, for elimination of child labor, for factory inspection laws, and for women’s suffrage (Gale Research-Discovering US History 5). During the times of World War I, Addams became a pacifist, position that diminished her popularity during these years. She believed in the “harmony of interests” among countries and nationalities, being possible to establish a relationship based on cooperation. In 1915 with the help of other women she founded the Women’s Peace Party. In 1931 she was awarded the Nobel Peace Price in recognition of “fifty years of social activism and service”(Handbook of American Women’s History 8). She died in May 1935 of cancer in Chicago. Jane Addams was a woman who wanted to do significant actions through her life, but the society in which she lived placed on women a role of submission, familiar life, and sanctity. She was a woman with characteristics of leadership, committed to a vision, but who lacked the legal power to transform into reality those changes she greatly wanted.

b. Susan Anthony She was born in 1820 in Massachusetts and grew under Quaker education. Her father transmitted the values of discipline and self-confidence. Her family supported the abolitionist and women’s rights movements. She started a career

25

as a teacher, not because she wanted, but for the limited choice women had at that moment of time. After teacher for more than a decade she finally found her north, reform. At the end of the civil war she started to fight for women’s right to suffrage, this became her lifetime goal. Politics became a major part of her life, sometimes lacking of a permanent home (Handbook of American Women’s History 31). When she became part of the Woman’s Suffrage Movement, she worked hard and continuously. She organized state and national conventions, collected signatures for a petition to give women the right to vote and own property. In 1860 women had their first victory. They were allowed to “control their own earnings and property, to enter into contracts, and to serve as the guardians of their children” (Gale Research- Discovering US History 3). But women still had to wait to be given the right to vote. However, Anthony’s strategy became a model for feminist causes (3). During 1868 and 1870, Susan was the editor of the Revolution as feminist weekly, where issues such as prostitution and divorce were discussed. In 1872 after reading an editorial Anthony claimed the right to register in order to vote. Other women followed Susan’s action, and converged at registration centers. Almost three weeks later, she was arrested and taken to trial (Gale ResearchDiscovering US History 4). Susan Anthony didn’t live to see her dream come true, but at least she was pleased with the number of changes that took place during her journey. She died in 1906 in Rochester, New York (Gale Research- Discovering US History 5).

26

As many other women in World’s History, Susan Anthony had the desired to accomplish a better and more equal life for women in the United States. She had two reasons for being a leader “perceived-inequity”, and the desired of being better. Her gender impeded her achieving powerful formal positions. She was the leader of a movement, with a long-term vision, the skills, and the motivation to keep working for years. Even though she didn’t have Positional Power (she was fighting for the opportunity to have it), her personality and expertise allowed her to have Personal Power.

c. Walt Disney Walter Ellias Disney was born in 1901 in Chicago, Illinois. The memories of his childhood were not immensely happy, especially those related to his difficult relationship with his father. Walter loved the country life, being in contact with animals, and was fascinated with trains (Gale Research-Discovering US History 1). When was fifteen and his family moved back to Chicago, he decided to stay alone in Kansas City, where he worked and took art lessons. When the war started Walter was anxious with the idea of going and wearing a uniform, but due to his age the army rejected him. With false documentation, he finally got accepted in the Red Cross and was send overseas, being an experience that marked his character (Gale Research-Discovering US History 2). While living in Kansas City the young Disney try a variety of jobs as commercial artist and cartoonist, and his curiosity for filmed cartons was borne.

27

At this point he met Ub Iwerks with whom Disney established a long relationship. They “started a long and interesting, often troubling, relationship between the consummate artist Iwerks and the consummate organizer and visionary Disney” (Gale Research-Discovering US History 2). Disney was married to Lillian Bounds in 1925, and started working on his next project a mouse called Mickey. He wrote different stories around this character and finally tried the incorporation of sound in one of his adventures. His experiment revolutionized the film industry and was acclaimed as one of the geniuses in this area. He was honored with Academy Awards in 1932, 1933,1935,1937, and 1939, while his studio was growing (Gale ResearchDiscovering US History 3). World War II and a labor union strike affected Disney’s studio during the decade of the 40’s. Despite the negative environment of this period, the studio still had success with characters such as Dumbo, The Three Caballeros, and Bambi. Disney’s creativity was continuously being imprinted on his work. He innovated by combining live action with his cartoons, doing documentaries, or by using controversial topics. But his most important work was the creation of Disneyland. “The fantastic success of Disneyland and the later Walt Disney World (1971) in Florida stood as final testimony to Disney’s courage and vision” (Gale Research-Discovering US History 4). Disney continued to have a successful career with his projects and even wining more Academy Awards, but his life came to an end in 1966. He died from lung cancer. He was a man that was not afraid of expressing his thoughts, giving

28

ideas, and putting his best effort on his work. He wanted to create smiles, and probably give himself the childhood he was denied (Gale Research-Discovering US History 5). Walter Ellias Disney was a Business Leader, a visionary, who had skills, perception, conviction, and character. He was an artist that didn’t need Positional Power in order to achieve his goals; his Personal Power and Leadership characteristics made him a successful businessman.

d. Gabrielle Chanel She was borne in August 19, 1883 in Saumur-France. She started making hats in Paris in 1910 taking her first steps into fashion. Gabrielle, better known as “Coco” revolutionized women fashion with her “straight, simple, uncorseted, and comfortable Chanel look”, she introduced the use of short hair for women, short skirts, and created her famous perfume Chanel No.5. Coco challenged an industry dominated by men, and took advantage of her own gender in order to become a successful businesswoman (Gale Research-Discovering US History 1). Coco’s rapid success cannot be explained merely by the chance occurrence of puff wind. Her entrance into couture was a deliberate, well-thought-out enterprise. Rich friend ready to help her, jersey, the war: all these circumstances Coco exploited to the utmost, following a plan conceived by someone intelligent enough

29

to perceive the tendencies of an epoch and the underlying trends of the present (Galante 40). According to Galante, Coco owed her triumph to her skills, talent, sense of timing, and courage to fight prejudices in taste (64). She was friend of artists and poets, Coco was in contact with the outside world an its changes. She dedicated her entire life to a define goal and no one could take her away from it (172-173). Coco Chanel was a visionary, a woman that challenged the fashion industry of her time. She imposed a style of dressing and looking that was not consonant with the ideal of a feminine figure. She was a leader, with motivation, skills, and perception; possessing the character and the conviction necessary to fight for her ideals. Gabrielle was an expert in fashion, and in visualizing the future trends of the artistic world.

30

IV. Conclusions and Recommendations Determining a relationship between Power and Leadership, was one of the purposes of this study. As explained in chapter IV, Power is related to Leadership in more than one way. The interactions that can emerge from these two variables are mainly three: individuals with Power and Leadership Characteristics, individuals with Power and no Leadership characteristics, and individuals with no Power and having Leadership characteristics. The “Triangle of Leadership and Power” is a visual help to identify these possible combinations. From the definitions of Power (Positional, Personal) and Leadership (Transformational) used in this study further combinations can be inferred. In order to verify if these combinations were real, the lives of historic and business figures were analyzed. Evidence was searched in order to verify if the figure possessed or lacked the characteristics bounded to each concept. Eight historic and two business figures were analyzed. The historic performance of each of these individuals resulted as expected. Leaders with Power had better opportunities to achieve their goals and be committed to their vision. Margaret Thatcher, Golda Meir, Simon Bolivar, had the power, resources, ideas, and the credibility, necessary to be successful according to the theory analyzed for this study. They had a vision that was well founded, and shared by others. Individuals with Power, but no characteristics of Leaders performed as expected. In general, history has qualified Jefferson Davis, Isabel Peron, Corazon Aquino, and Benazir Bhutto as not very successful governors. They had the required Positional Power, but they didn’t have the characteristics of

31

Leadership required to be successful in their positions. Isabel Peron, Corazon Aquino, and Benazir Bhutto didn’t have a vision. They had goals, and desires of revenge, but they didn’t have a vision shared by those that surrounded them or the people they were governing. To be a Leader is necessary to have more than the power given by title. Jefferson Davis was a different case. His dream was to be a military and this was reflected in his authoritative style. Davis just wasn’t highly motivated to be a civil leader. Finally, individuals with characteristics of Leaders, but no Positional Power as Jane Addams, Susan Anthony, Walt Disney, and Gabrielle Chanel, are going to be fighting for the realization of their vision. The cases of Addams and Anthony, would probably be the best examples. Prepared women that wanted to have a more active role in society, but it was denied just because of their gender. Many women identified themselves with the cause of Addams and Anthony, becoming their individual fights a common one. They were striving to achieve Positional Power. They were productive leaders, but probably had been more if they had had in their hands the required Positional Power to make things change a little bit faster. Walt Disney and Coco Chanel were business leaders. Each made an impact in the respective area, the film and fashion industry. Both were visionaries, people ahead of their time, who convinced others to follow their dream. They had skills, motivations, and courage, to accept criticism and still stand for their beliefs. They held Personal Power, and learned to deal with the lack of Positional Power.

32

After analyzing each figure a number of issues became evident. First, in many cases external conditions such as wars, difficult economic times, death, make leaders bloom. Of course internal characteristics and qualities would have a major importance, but in many cases the occurrence of an unexpected event triggered the development of the future leader. Second, having a general vision that survives time or events appears to be a decisive factor in the success or failure of the leader. Third, the characteristics admired in leaders could change according to culture. Factors such as gender, marital status can influence the credibility of the leader. The recommendations that resulted from this study to managers are •

to identify if any of the three combinations analyzed in this study are present in the organization, in order to take specific actions that will allow that individual to achieve higher levels of productivity.

•

to identify the ways Power is being used in the organization. Is it Integrative (involving and motivating people), Destructive (creating enemies or discordance), or Productive (developing a learning and creative environment)?

All individuals have a relevant skill, something they do at their best, and one of the functions of managers should be to identify it and help that individual to develop that skill. For future researchers it would be interesting to analyze the way Power and Leadership are defined in other cultures, and if gender, marital status, and age, have an effect on Power and Leadership.

33

34