We live in the twenty-first century, which witnessed by far the most intensive marketing of politics, and traditional approaches (The Great Man Theory, situational, relational) to the process of emergence of political leader-ship are simply not enough. Cooperation between leaders and their followers is determined by cultural and social context, specific political situation of the time, patterns of social behavior. Development of new information technolo-gies and dissemination of the means of mass communication have introduced another factor to the analyzed process, forced by civilisational changes. These changes initiated the processes shaping the emergence of a fourth approach to political leadership, which we may call reactive. Reactivity is an active process of management of the changing image of the leader, responding to the evolving social preferences, and subsequently disseminated through the media.
This chapter outlines the distinctive features and challenges of politics, governance, and leadership at the meso-level within national states, that is, provinces, regions, and states. It documents how regional interests, identities, and dynamics along with electoral and constitutional arrangements create meso-level political opportunity structures, as well as intergovernmental relations. It contrasts actor-centred and institutionalist approaches to understanding regional leadership, and discusses the various methodologies employed by scholars in this area. After critiquing what is currently a small yet disparate and conceptually poorly developed field, it concludes by sketching promising future directions.
Autori u radu istražuju fenomen političkoga vodstva kao jednoga od segmenata šireg koncepta društvenog vodstva. Ukazuju na više definicija potvrđujući činjenicu da se vodstvo danas u suvremenoj literaturi različito definira. Za dublje razumijevanje teme ukazuje se na osnovne elemente i aktivnosti (posao) vodstva. Razumijevanje političkoga vodstva znači i razumijevanje utjecaja političke kulture. Ukazano je na ključnu razliku između vodstva i upravljanja kao i specifičnosti predsjedničkoga vodstva. Političko vodstvo u užemu kontekstu uvijek se razmatra preko izvora autoriteta i moći, te etike vodstva. Ovaj rad time daje osnove teorijskoga pristupa proučavanja političkog liderstva. ; The authors research the phenomenon of political leadership as one of the segments of the broader concept of social leadership. It is pointed to several definitions, confirming the fact that leadership is defined differently in contemporary literature today. For a deeper understanding of the topic, the basic elements and activities (work) of leadership are outlined. Understanding political leadership also means understanding the impact of political culture. The key difference between leadership and management, as well as the specifics of presidential leadership, is pointed out. In a narrow context, political leadership is always analysed through sources of authority and power, and ethics of leadership. This paper provides the basis for a theoretical approach to the study of political leadership.
Those who do not read Japanese seldom have access to analytic studies of the fascinating and surprisingly diverse world of contemporary Japanese political leadership. This volume constitutes a step toward bringing to the English reader some sense of the norms, beliefs, styles, and modes of exercising power of Japanese political leaders and the organizational and political contexts which are changing leadership role expectations. The second volume in this series concentrates more explicitly on leadership recruitment, although the subject is also addressed here. All of the essays in this volume highlight specific politicians, while attempting to develop analytic categories to understand the broader significance of these types of leaders. Included are the following: a Liberal Democratic Party prime minister and faction leader (Fukuda Takeo) who rose "almost effortlessly" to the pinnacle of power on the basis of an elitist educational and bureaucratic career background and another (Tanaka Kakuei) who took advantage of the chaotic wartime and immediate postwar period to overcome the limitations of his commoner background by developing an entrepreneurial style that makes him even today "the most powerful in Japan"; a younger conservative leader (Kono Yohei) who, with certain others of his generation, found life within the restrictive but predictable career paths of ruling Liberal Democrats less attractive than the risky option of forming his own New Liberal Club; an unconventional Socialist chairman (Asukata Ichio) who bucks the pull toward coalition making among the opposition parties in favor of his belief that this major but perpetual opposition party must first reconstruct itself and structure a new popular consensus that can legitimize a coalitional alternative to the Liberal Democrats; parliamentary leaders (like lower-house speaker Maeo Shigesaburo, directors of the House Management Committee, and heads of the Diet policy committees of the various parties) who are projected into increasingly influential roles by changing electoral trends and popular expectations; an innovative and dynamic mayor (Suzuki Heizaburo) who, taking advantage of the considerable authority afforded by Japan's "presidential" system of local chief executives, pursues his own priorities, mobilizing the requisite support despite the lack of national guidance and the oppositions of former backers; and the "power behind the throne" (Matsunaga Yasuzaemon and Komori Takeshi) whose visions move prime ministers and governors as well as their own followers in powerful public and private bureaucracies.
This chapter surveys how the field has addressed the central puzzles of political leadership by discussing several key dichotomies that have been the focal point of scholarly inquiry and debate past and present: leaders and leadership; democrats and dictators; causes and consequences; actors and context; personal qualities and luck; success and failure; and art and science. The authors conclude that the study of leadership is a somewhat bewildering enterprise because there is no unified theory of leadership. There are too many definitions, and too many theories in too many disciplines. They do not agree on the meaning of leadership, on how to study it, or even why we study it. The subject is not just beset by dichotomies; it is also multifaceted, and essentially contested. Finally, the authors provide a brief conspectus of the Handbook.
We model the choice of leaders of groups within society, where leaders influence both the mode of interaction between groups (either peaceful compromise or costly conflict) and the outcome of these interactions. Group members may choose leaders strategically/instrumentally or they may choose leaders expressively. We characterize the equilibria of the instrumental choice model and also argue that leadership elections may overemphasise the role of expressive considerations in the choice of leader, and that this may result in increased conflict between groups.
This introductory chapter sets out the conceptual and methodological rationale for the book. The chapter reviews the field and places this new approach within the context of current leadership research. The Leadership Capital Index (LCI) builds on advances in understanding of how to track and assess political leadership. It offers the concept of "leadership capital," as an aggregate of authority that reaches across the traditional divide between structure and agency through a flexible analytical tool. The LCI offers a comprehensive yet parsimonious and easily applicable ten-point matrix to examine leadership authority over time and in different political contexts. The chapter sets out how this tool is utilized in the examination of the eleven-country case studies to better understand and explain the "puzzles" of contemporary political leadership.
Unique in its demands as a system of governance, democracy requires active citizen leadership to be successful. Citizen leadership, in turn, requires engagement based on knowledge and action. Therefore, civic and political education is essential to the success of any democracy. This article discusses a model of applied political and civic leadership education that is based in theory, yet practical to the lives of young people. Surveys of past participants demonstrate that after the program, participants are more confident that they have the skills to become involved in politics and in community life.
This editorial introduces the special issue and considers what the articles tell us about new approaches to political leadership. The editorial explains how each article engages with the core puzzles of political leadership and brings together many diverse theoretical and methodological approaches to the study of political leadership, a vibrant area of study currently in the midst of an academic renaissance.
This item is part of the Political & Rights Issues & Social Movements (PRISM) digital collection, a collaborative initiative between Florida Atlantic University and University of Central Florida in the Publication of Archival, Library & Museum Materials (PALMM). ; This pamphlet contains articles from authors such as Alex Bittelman, James W. Ford and Charles Krumbein.
The article is concerned with analyzing the character of the model of Serbian political leadership with respect to its endurance over an extended period. The author traces the analogies between the leadership models of Serbian leaders active in different periods and historical contexts: Prince Miloš Obrenović (1780–1860), Prime Minister Nikola Pašić (1845–1926) and President Slobodan Milošević (1941–2006). Over this extended period, the type of leadership remained relatively constant in response to a certain set of expectations that reflected the values regarded as fundamental by Serbian society, and in particular: stability of social relations, egalitarianism, collectivism, and conservatism. As this set of values changed little over the examined period, the archetype of Serbian leader as an advocate of egalitarianism, a warrior and a tribune of the people, that had emerged in response to Ottoman domination, remained relevant.
The article analyzes the archetype of Serbian political leadership and compares it with the present-day model, on the basis of traditions and expectations of the Serbian society of their leader. ; Analiza archetypu serbskiego przywództwa politycznego i porównanie go z modelem współczesnym, na bazie tradycji i oczekiwań serbskiego społeczeństwa wobec lidera.
Analiza archetypu serbskiego przywództwa politycznego i porównanie go z modelem współczesnym, na bazie tradycji i oczekiwań serbskiego społeczeństwa wobec lidera. ; The article analyzes the archetype of Serbian political leadership and compares it with the present-day model, on the basis of traditions and expectations of the Serbian society of their leader.
