Leadership has a formal aspect (as in most political or business leadership) or an informal one (as in most friendships).

Speaking of "leadership" (the abstract term)
rather than of "leading" (the action) usually it implies that the entities doing the leading have some "leadership skills" or competencies.Different Types of leadership styles:The laissez-faire “leave it be” leadership (Lewin, Liippit, & White, 1939) is the leadership style that gives no continuous feedback or supervision because the employees are highly experienced and need little supervision to obtain the expected outcome. On the other hand, this type of style is also associated with leaders that don’t lead at all, failing in supervising team members, resulting in lack of control and higher costs, bad service or failure to meet deadlines.The bureaucratic leader (Weber, 1905) is very structured and follows the procedures as they have been established. This type of leadership has no space to explore new ways to solve problems and is usually slow paced to ensure adherence to the ladders stated by the company. Leaders ensure that all the steps have been followed prior to sending it to the next level of authority. Universities, hospitals, banks and government usually require this type of leader in their organizations to ensure quality, increase security and decrease corruption. Leaders that try to speed up the process will experience frustration and anxiety.The charismatic leader (Weber, 1905) leads by infusing energy and eagerness into their team members. This type of leader has to be committed to the organization for the long run. If the success of the division or project is attributed to the leader and not the team, charismatic leaders may become a risk for the company by deciding to resign for advanced opportunities. It takes the company time and hard work to gain the employees' confidence back with other type of leadership after they have committed themselves to the magnetism of a charismatic leader.Autocratic leadership (Lewin, Liippit, & White, 1939) occurs when the leader has been given the power to take decisions based solely on his person, having total authority. This leadership style is good for employees that need close supervision to perform certain tasks. Creative employees and team players resent this type of leadership, since they are unable to enhance processes or decision making, resulting in job dissatisfaction.The democratic leader (Lewin, Liippit, & White, 1939) means that the leader will hear the team's ideas and study them, but will make the final decision. Team players contribute to the final decision thus increasing employee satisfaction and ownership, feeling their input was considered when the final decision was taken. When changes arises, this type of leadership helps the team assimilate the changes better and more rapidly than other styles, knowing they were consulted and contributed to the decision making process, minimizing resistance and intolerance. A shortcoming of this leadership style is that it has difficulty when decisions are needed in a short period of time or at the moment.People-Oriented Leader (Fiedler, 1967) is the one that, in order to comply with effectiveness and efficiency, supports, trains and develops his personnel, increasing job satisfaction and genuine interest to do a good job.Task oriented leaders (Fiedler, 1967) are those who focus on the job, and concentrate in the specific tasks assigned to each employee to reach goal accomplishment. This leadership style suffers the same motivation issues as autocratic leadership, showing no involvement in the teams needs. It requires close supervision and control to achieve expected results.A servant leader (Greenleaf, 1977) is the leader that facilitates goal accomplishment by giving its team members what they need in order to be productive. This leader is an instrument employees use to reach the goal rather than an commanding voice that moves to change. This leadership style, in a manner similar to democratic leadership, tends to achieve the results in a slower time frame than other styles, although employee engagement is higher.A transaction leader (Burns, 1978) is the power given to a certain person to perform certain tasks and reward or punish for the team’s performance. It gives the opportunity to the manager to lead the group and the group agrees to follow his lead to accomplish a predetermined goal in exchange for something else. Power is given to the leader to evaluate, correct and train subordinates when productivity is not up to the desired level and reward effectiveness when expected outcome is reached.A transformation leader (Burns, 1978) is the one who motivates its team to be effective and efficient. Communication is the base for goal achievement focusing the group in the final desired outcome or goal attainment. This leader is highly visible and uses chain of command to get the job done. Transformational leaders focus on the big picture, needing to be surrounded by people who take care of the details. The leader is always looking for ideas that move the organization to reach the company’s vision.The Environment Leader (Carmazzi, 2005) is the one who nurtures group or organisational environment to affect the emotional and psychological perception of an individual’s place in that group or organisation. An understanding and application of group psychology and dynamics is essential for this style to be effective. The leader uses organisational culture to inspire individuals and develop leaders at all levels. This leadership style relies on creating an education matrix where groups interactively learn the fundamental psychology of group dynamics and culture from each other. The leader uses this psychology, and complementary language, to influence direction through the members of the inspired group to do what is required for the benefit of all.The situation leader (Joseph Praveen Kumar,Hersey, Blanchard, & Johnson, 2008) is the leader that uses different leadership styles depending on the situation and the type of employee that is being supervised. Teleology (Greek: telos: end, purpose) is the philosophical study of design and purpose. In general it may be said that there are two types of final cause, which may be called intrinsic finality and extrinsic finality. Extrinsic finality consists of a being realizing a purpose outside that being, for the utility and welfare of other beings. For

instance, minerals are "designed" to be used by plants which are in turn "designed" to be used by animals - and similarly humanity serves some ultimate good beyond itself.Intrinsic finality consists of a being realizing a purpose directed toward the perfection of its own nature. In essence, it is what is "good for" a being. Just as physical masses obey universal gravitational tendencies, which did not evolve, but are simply a cosmic "given", so life is intended to behave in certain ways so as to preserve itself from death, disease, and pain.Feminist theory aims to understand the nature of inequality and focuses on gender politics, power relations and sexuality. While generally providing a critique of social relations, much of feminist theory also focuses on analyzing gender inequality and the promotion of women's rights, interests, and issues. Themes explored in feminism include discrimination, stereotyping, objectification (especially sexual objectification), oppression, and patriarchy. Psychoanalytic feminism is based on Freud and his psychoanalytic theories. It maintains that gender is not biological but is based on the psycho-sexual development of the individual. Psychoanalytical feminists believe that gender inequality comes from early childhood experiences, which lead men to believe themselves to be masculine, and women to believe themselves feminine. A radical feminist would argue that the only way to rid womankind from male domination is to segregate men and women into two different communities. Socialist feminists do believe that men can coexist with women in this post-capitalist vision of the future. With the abolition of the class structure, a socialist may argue, comes the erosion of male domination within society. Feminism, though not a unified theory, is among the most influential of current theoretical perspectives. Focusing their analyses on gender inequalities and on the institution of patriarchy, feminists have sought to understand society from the standpoint of women. Feminists have criticized all three of the traditionally dominant theoretical perspectives--functionalism, symbolic interactionism, and conflict theory-as biased toward male points of view. However, the feminist movement has also had its limitations. Most feminists have been white middle-class women, and feminist literature from the early days of the movement (1965-85) often neglected the concerns of working-class women and women of color. In recent years, however, some feminists have begun to analyze the ways that race, class, and gender inequalities intersect. For instance, Patricia Hill Collins in her book, Black Feminist Thought (1990), argues that the common experiences of African American women have given them a unique perspective on social theory. Feminists come in a variety of theoretical stripes. Early feminists divided themselves up into liberal, radical, or socialist camps, depending on their political points of view. Today, many feminist sociologists continue to draw heavily on the conflict theory tradition, while many others have been influenced by symbolic interactionism. A few even call themselves functionalists or rational choice theorists (see below and see England 1993).

Postcolonial Theory - as metaphysics, ethics, and politics - addresses matters of identity, gender, race, racism and ethnicity with the challenges of developing a post-colonial
national identity, of how a colonised people's knowledge was used against them in service of the coloniser's interests, and of how knowledge about the world is generated under specific relations between the powerful and the powerless, circulated repetitively and finally legitimated in service to certain imperial interests. At the same time, postcolonial theory encourages thought about the colonised's creative resistance to the coloniser and how that resistance complicates and gives texture to European imperial colonial projects, which utilised a range of strategies, including anti-conquest narratives, to legitimise their dominance. A term for a collection of theoretical strategies used to examine the culture of former colonies of the European empires and their relation to the rest of the world. Edward Said - Orientalism (1978) cited as the beginning of theoretical work about post colonialism. Said's thesis was that while the portraits of the culture did not represent reality, their contours were a product of real conditions of imperialism. In other words, the literary product of a colonized nation, which uses the language of the colonizer, does not represent the reality of the indigenous people rather it reflects the influence and power of the colonizer. Current post colonial theorists - Spivak and Bhabha, for instance - bring to the study of post colonial literature theoretical techniques ranging from feminism, Marxism, cultural materialism, deconstruction Post-modernity is a derivative referring to non-art aspects of history that were influenced by the new movement, namely developments in society, economy and culture since the 1960s. Label given to Cultural forms since the 1960s that display the following qualities: Self reflexivity: this involves the seemingly paradoxical combination of self-consciousness and some sort of historical grounding. Irony: Post modernism uses irony as a primary mode of expression, but it also abuses, installs, and subverts conventions and usually negotiates contradictions through irony. Boundaries: Post modernism challenges the boundaries between genres, art forms, theory and art, high art and the mass media. Constructs: Post modernism is actively involved in examining the constructs society creates including, but not exclusively, the following: 1.Nation: Post modernism examines the construction of nations/nationality and questions such constructions. 2.Gender: Post modernism reassesses gender, the construction of gender, and the role of gender in cultural formations, 3. Race: Post modernism questions and reassesses constructs of race. 4. Sexuality: Post modernism questions and reassesses constructs of sexuality.

Marxism is the political philosophy and practice derived from the work of Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels. While there are many theoretical and practical differences
among the various forms of Marxism, most forms of Marxism share: *a belief that capitalism is based on the exploitation[4] of workers by the owners of capital, *a belief that people's consciousness of the conditions of their lives reflects the dominant ideology which is in turn shaped by material conditions and relations of production, *an understanding of class in terms of differing relations of production, and as a particular position within such relations, *an understanding of material conditions and social relations as historically malleable, *a view of history according to which class struggle, the evolving conflict between classes with opposing interests, structures each historical period and drives historical change and *a belief that this dialectical historical process will ultimately result in a replacement of the current class structure of society with a system that manages society for the good of all, resulting in the dissolution of the class structure and its support (more often than not including the nation state). Absolute idealism is an ontologically monistic philosophy attributed to G.W.F. Hegel. It is Hegel's account of how being is ultimately comprehensible as an all-inclusive whole. Hegel asserted that in order for the thinking subject (human reason or consciousness) to be able to know its object (the world) at all, there must be in some sense an identity of thought and being. Otherwise, the subject would never have access to the object and we would have no certainty about any of our knowledge of the world. To account for the differences between thought and being, however, as well as the richness and diversity of each, the unity of thought and being cannot be expressed as the abstract identity "A=A". Absolute idealism is the attempt to demonstrate this unity using a new "speculative" philosophical method, which requires new concepts and rules of logic. According to Hegel, the absolute ground of being is essentially a dynamic, historical process of necessity that unfolds by itself in the form of increasingly complex forms of being and of consciousness, ultimately giving rise to all the diversity in the world and in the concepts with which we think and make sense of the world. Evolution There are two major mechanisms driving evolution. The first is natural selection, a process causing heritable traits that are helpful for survival and reproduction to become more common in a population, and harmful traits to become more rare. This occurs because individuals with advantageous traits are more likely to reproduce, so that more individuals in the next generation inherit these traits.[1][2] Over many generations, adaptations occur through a combination of successive, small, random changes in traits, and natural selection of those variants best-suited for their environment.[3] In contrast, genetic drift produces random changes in the frequency of traits in a population. Genetic drift results from the role probability plays in whether a given trait will be passed on as individuals randomly survive and reproduce. Though the changes produced in any one generation by drift and selection are small, differences accumulate with each subsequent generation and can, over time, cause substantial changes in the organisms. Pantayong Pananaw comes from two Filipino root words, "tayo" and "pananaw." "Tayo" in the Filipino language is used as a collective and inclusive form of "we", referring both to the speaker and listeners, while "pananaw" means perspective or outlook. Pantayong Pananaw would then refer to a historical theory or dialogue that consists of both active (speakers) and passive (listeners) subjects in their own discourses. Using the Pantayong Pananaw perspective, "kasaysayan" not history, is now defined as "salaysay ukol sa nakaraan o nakalipas na may saysay para sa isang grupo ng tao at iniuulat sa pamamagitan ng sariling wika." First of all, the original language of the Filipinos and other indigenous groups in the Philippines must be used in writing Philippine history. Language as proposed by the advocates of Pantayong Pananaw serves as the root and backbone of the Filipino experience. Pantayong Pananaw believes that although foreigners can learn and speak the local and national languages of the Philippines, they do not have a frequent and whole-hearted understanding and grasp of these languages. Writing history using Pantayong Pananaw would therefore hinge on using and tapping the local and national languages. Pantayo believes that foreigners and foreign languages do not effectively capture or convey the message, local ideas, symbols, definitions, and feelings of the Filipino psyche. Aside from using the local and national languages, Pantayong Pananaw supports the use of unconventional type of sources. Since this historical theory presupposes that most official documents, manuscripts, and other books written by foreigners are tainted with biases (since they represent the foreigners' perspectives and worldviews), Pantayong Pananaw states that historians must also make use of unconventional sources that are untainted by any foreign biases. Historians using Pantayong Pananaw would use other avenues of locating and reading these said sources. Because of this, Filipino historians using the Pantayong Pananaw perspective usually use least likely sources such as revolutionary songs, soldiers' letters, poems, plays, games, and sculptures. Pantayo advocates also relies on oral histories as means of substantiating and buttressing their ideas and concepts, in congruence with other conventional sources.

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful