“A genuine leader is
not a searcher for consensus but a molder of consensus.” –Martin Luther King, Jr.
In my personal view, Tariq Pervaiz, the Chief Minister
of KP’s interim government 2013, was an inspirational leader who went by the
book and brought the political bodies under one umbrella. During his term, the
entertainment budget of CM house was reduced from Rs 4.5 million to 0.5 million
and the money was allocated for other altruistic projects. His headship, though
short lived, was a perfect example of Laissez-Faire
leadership that encompassed and valued the advice of his subordinates,
fostering harmony with smooth functioning of the government.
Moreover, Franklin D. Roosevelt, the US president, won
the 1940 elections by promising the nation that US would refrain from any involvement
in the World War 2 if he were re-elected. Though, later, America became actively
involved in the war but initially the President was able to play rivals against
each other and proposed with agenda that was popular amongst the masses, featuring
Transactional Leadership qualities.
Furthermore, Transformational Leadership qualities can
be seen in Imran Khan who has emerged as a visionary figure, mobilizing support
of the nation through his charismatic character and ability to inspire people.
One cannot say with certainty as to which one is the
most effective style of leadership. However, in my view, the one that can
gather the nation under one flag and persuade it to comply with the leaders' policies is the best one.
1 comment:
But can transformational leaders be dangerous? Hitler was very charismatic, but look where he took Germany. Zulfikar Bhutto was also considered to be a charismatic leader, but look what he did to Pakistan. I think that one should always remember that charismatic leaders do have the potential to change the direction of the body politic, but that they can also do great harm.
Post a Comment