Position, Personal, and Coercion styles of Leadership
Leaders select a leadership style that fits their end goals and deems the selected style as the best tool for achieving their goals. Leadership positions give people power that is essentially the capacity of an individual or an entity to influence others’ behavior (Northouse, 2018). There are three basic leadership styles that include position, personal, and coercive that manifests themselves in everyday life. People derive power from their position in the office or daily interactions and their ability to influence others or both. People who have the capability of influencing the actions of other people because of their position in the organization or society are deemed to possess positional power. Positional power is not restricted to office relations because it is experienced in other aspects of life, such as family or other types of relationships (Smith & Hofmann, 2016). Positional power is exercised using high and low power roles, such as the ability to manipulate others in real-world experiences. People with high positional power have a greater sense of responsibility. However, the sense of responsibility changes depending on the situation. Leaders in an organizational setting are bound by rules and regulations because they are expected to achieve given targets, and hence, they have a greater sense of responsibility. They use their authority to ensure that employees work in a specific manner to achieve the organizational objectives. In organizations, positional power is based on external elements, and it can be taken away.
A person possessing positional power can also have personal power depending on the impact they have on their followers. Personal power depends on the personal characteristics of the leader and is not derived from their position. Rather, it is linked to the integrity of the leader and the readiness and willingness to fulfill their promises. Leaders with personal power inspire and motivate their followers to participate fully in the attainment of the set goals and objectives. Once a leader does more good with their position rather than controlling others and use their power responsibly, they become an inspiration to others. They use their power to attain a greater good for the organization and their followers that, in turn, influence the outcomes of their followers (Haller, Fischer & Frey, 2018). Personal power emanates from the personal characteristics of the leader, and hence, it is based on internal factors that cannot be taken away. Such characteristics include ethical decision-making, emotional intelligence, interpersonal skills, empathy, and skills, among others.
Hence there is a distinction between personal and positional leadership styles. Positional power is based on the position of an individual and depends on external factors. The leadership entails imposing power on followers, does not require social skills, and it can be taken away through demotion or termination of employment. On the other hand, personal power is earned because the followers recognize their leader and willing to follow and corporate with their instructions. It comes from the personal characteristics of the leader, and they achieve results because they are able to inspire and motivate their followers to achieve the set targets. Personal power is permanent because it based on individual characteristics. It involves the use of personal and social skills to influence others.
Coercion is a specific type of power that employs threats to force compliance with orders. Coercive power comprises of threats, severe punishment, and thorough monitoring to force action and disallow free-riding. However, power creates an antagonistic climate that emanates from enforced compliance (Hofmann et al., 2017). Coercive power applies force rather than persuasion to compel action or behavior. People are threatened with pay cuts, termination, unpaid leaves, or demotion if they fail to comply with the given orders. Coercion affects the motive of cooperation because people are forced to comply with the orders due to the fear of monitoring and subsequent punishment. The efficiency of this form of power depends on the ability of the leader to monitor and detect breaches of the orders and the implementation of issued threats. However, if such breaches are not detected or the threats are not implemented, it reduces the legitimacy of the leader, and the level of cooperation declines.
Barack Obama and Personal Leadership
The former U.S. president, Barack Obama, is an example of a leader who demonstrated personal leadership in the two terms that he led the country. He used his position to do greater good to the country and the world in general. He used his social skills rally the population around hi ‘Yes We Can’ slogan and his message of ‘Change We can Believe In’ that encompassed the vision to make society a better place. He went beyond the roles of a commander-in-chief to focus on mitigating climate change, improve inclusivity in politics, expand the scope of human rights, and promote peace in the world, among other achievements. He was an ethical leader who influenced his followers through his actions and motivated them to achieve his administration agenda. He was a skillful and charismatic leader who demonstrates personal leadership.
References
Haller, D. K., Fischer, P., & Frey, D. (2018). The Power of Good: A Leader’s Personal Power as a Mediator of the Ethical Leadership-Follower Outcomes Link. Frontiers in psychology, 9, 1094.
Hofmann, E., Hartl, B., Gangl, K., Hartner-Tiefenthaler, M., & Kirchler, E. (2017). Authorities’ coercive and legitimate power: the impact on cognitions underlying cooperation. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, 5.
Northouse, P. G. (2018). Leadership: Theory and practice. Sage publications.
Smith, P. K., & Hofmann, W. (2016). Power in everyday life. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 113(36), 10043-10048.