NIM:2011145002
Jurusan: Hotel Management
Answer No.1:
The conclusion of the reading is meant as a leader hvasi weshould all be able to govern, lead, motivate all employees so thatall the objectives of a company / organization can be achieved. In addition A leader must also be able to provide a good exemplarof its employees to be applicable to all these good qualities at work everyday.
Answer No.2:
This definition of leadership, I think, captures the leadership essentials of inspiration and preparation. Effective leadership is based upon ideas, but won't happen unless those ideas can be communicated to others in a way that engages them.
Put even more simply, the leader is the inspiration and director of the action. He is the person in the group that possesses the combination of personality and leadership skills that makes others want to follow his direction.
In business, leadership is welded to performance. Those who are viewed as effective leaders are those who increase their company's bottom lines.
To further confuse the definition of leadership, we tend to use the terms "leadership" and "management" interchangeably, referring to a company's management structure as its leadership, or to individuals who are actually managers as the "leaders" of various management teams.
I am not saying that this is a bad thing, just pointing out that leadership involves more. To be effective, a leader certainly has to manage the resources at her disposal. But leadership also involves communicating, inspiring and supervising - just to name three more of the primary leadership skills a leader has to have to be successful.
Is a leader born or made? While there are people who seem to be naturally endowed with more leadership abilities than others, I believe that people can learn to become leaders by improving particular leadership skills.
Answer No.3:
Duty seems old-fashioned these days. You hear few people talk about it, but it is vital to leadership from within. Duty is a concept that says people have an obligation to behave in particular ways and undertake tasks because of an allegiance to something greater. One might feel a duty to family or friends, to an entity, or to an idea. The exact nature of an obligation isn't as important in this case as the necessity of fulfilling it.
You can't lead from inside an organization if all that motivates you is your own self-interest. You can't dismiss self-interest, but, really, there are better and more efficient ways of serving it. And you can't lead inside an organization if you feel no bond to it and its mission. If you do have the connection, then you are acting from duty, which is something you can practice in many ways under different circumstances.
It's necessary to remember why you do something if you are actually to accomplish it. You can easily lose your way, winding up doing something completely different that doesn't really achieve what you wanted in the first place. Act from duty, though, and you keep the fundamental principle before you.
Be Committed
Acting from duty also isn't enough without commitment. It is one of the most common human traits to begin something and then, for whatever reason, to give up — usually while telling yourself that it's either not your fault or fooling yourself into thinking you accomplished what you wanted to. Listen to others and to yourself and hear the excuses. Don't beat yourself (or others) over this because it is part of human nature. To lead, however, you need to get beyond the willingness to give up. You must insist on doing what you have said you will do. Duty may support the end, but commitment is about the means and the process — the journey. You can't lead if you don't want to go where you must or if you aren't willing to keep putting one foot in front of the other. This is why duty and commitment are crucial.
Don't Wait for Others
People often abdicate their own responsibility and look to those in power instead. They assume the person in charge will take care of all the problems. But a funny thing happens. When you wait for the powers that be to ride in like the cavalry, they never show up. Ironically, that's largely because those authorities can't make things better. At best, they can rally others and help channel their help into useful action.
As you can see, the powers that be are actually highly dependent on all the other people in the organization. You wait for them, but in reality, they wait for you. It's a circle that can keep you chasing your own tail for years. The only way out is to become a leader by doing. When you stop waiting for others, they may find that you're the one they've been waiting for, giving you more freedom than you might think.
Must Do
It seems clear that if you're going to become a leader from within an organization, you need to take action. It's not enough to want to take action. You have to know that you need to take action.
People don't act without reason. What compels them may be selfish or selfless. They may work from intellectual curiosity or emotional fervor. Their motives might be well thought out or they might come on utter impulse. The one constant is that there is something they want. If they wanted nothing from the situation, they would do nothing.
You need a must, an imperative that comes from your belief in the goals or principles or even possibilities of the organization. It's good if you have personal reasons as well, but only if they augment the desire to help the group in its endeavors. If you act solely from your own desires, then you won't be leading. You'll be running a con job to get what you want — and people will know it.
When you act from something higher, however, you offer inspiration and vision because you are connecting action with principle, and that is motivation. You're offering an opportunity to experience something that is rare in the world. That's a big reason why people respond. They want a taste of that in their lives.
Answer No.4:
The three major styles of leadership are:
- Authoritarian or autocratic
- Participative or democratic
- Delegative or Free Reign
Although good leaders use all three styles, with one of them normally dominant, bad leaders tend to stick with one style.
If i am a leadership i will usePARTICIPATIVE
Because,
This style involves the leader including one or more employees in the decision making process (determining what to do and how to do it). However, the leader maintains the final decision making authority. Using this style is not a sign of weakness, rather it is a sign of strength that your employees will respect.
This is normally used when you have part of the information, and your employees have other parts. Note that a leader is not expected to know everything — this is why you employknowledgeable and skillful employees. Using this style is of mutual benefit — it allows them to become part of the team and allows you to make better decisions.
DELEGATIVE
In this style, the leader allows the employees to make the decisions. However, the leader is still responsible for the decisions that are made. This is used when employees are able to analyze the situation and determine what needs to be done and how to do it. You cannot do everything! You must set priorities and delegate certain tasks.
This is not a style to use so that you can blame others when things go wrong, rather this is a style to be used when you fully trust and confidence in the people below you. Do not be afraid to use it, however, use it wisely!
NOTE: This is also known as laissez faire (or lais·ser faire), which is the noninterference in the affairs of others. [French : laissez, second person pl. imperative of laisser, to let, allow + faire, to do
