In a Washington Monthly piece, Raymond Smith explains the facts regarding Belgium and its ability to live for twenty months without a government (Raymond, 2013). This was triggered by the Prime Minister's resignation, which made it difficult for the opposing parties to compromise in order for someone to fill the void. The data clearly shows that Belgium functioned quite well despite without a leader for over two years. If it had happened in the United States, this could have meant nearly half of any presidential term. Children went to school, adults received services such as health care and food, and life went on as usual. Normal life was unaffected by the leadership vacuum. But it is still this argument that I would like to use to state my thesis that nothing matters more than leadership as written by John Mariotti, in his review of the book ‘’HOPE IS NOT A STRATEGY: Leadership Lessons from the Obama Presidency’’ (John, 2012). A leader makes or breaks an organization. Without leadership, there cannot be an organization, a government or a common people. It does make all the difference. The Belgian case as used by many people to disregard the essence of leadership assumes one fact that institutions were still there to run the show. What could have gone a miss is a lack of someone to make the decisions that a prime minister ought to make, which indeed affected them, though not to a greater extent.
Leadership entails all the facts that show the direction in an organization. The uniting factor in any of these places is leadership. Rarely will people work together in groups unless they have a leader who can keep them focused and directed to the goal?
Talking about strong leadership, Dr. Tom Vine, puts a glimpse of light into some limitations to the very essence of leadership (Dr. Tom, 2016). In recruitment he argues, people are most attracted to those similar to them. This is a strong point to consider especially when looking at the organization culture. Any person from a sociological perspective welcomes any person they have a similar mindset and outlook. This could mean a lack of diversity in an organization. The very beauty of any organization is its diversity and this point actually further showcases that leadership does make a difference.
The perception of control is central to ordering life and people. Psychologically, there is a perception that a leader will put things in order, make some changes which are necessary according to the society, and this perception is a strong basis to consider leadership as a key essence. It is a culturally inculcated trait in human beings since people are born into organized societies, a disposition which aligns a preference for having a leader than lacking one.
The other more reason why leadership is central to any organization is the necessity of certainty. No one person wants to be left in a limbo without knowing where to go or the direction to follow. A situation where a group of people is working without a leader will see them pursue different goals and objectives, at times even overriding each other. Leadership brings this orderliness and certainty of what each person needs to do and at what time they interlink with other people. The order is better by far than freedom, but order in freedom is more beneficial. Psychologists have found out that too many concurrent changes often invoke anxiety and lack of certainty into how things are to fashion in future can be the start of many problems.
Take for example the recent happens in the presidential race in the United States. The Current demonstrations that have taken place and the various executive orders that have been given by the office of the president have left many in a limbo. Immigrants from other regions, refugees from blacklisted countries are now stranded. Leadership in a country is critical due to the policy changes that are bound to come with any leader. Every part of life is pegged on the decisions of this one person, and even if people may want to assume it, the effects will automatically leave them more confused than ever. Businesses depend on this person to know the places to invest, the regulatory actions they need to fulfil and so on.
In a review about Margaret Thatcher, the writer speaks of how she was different than other prime ministers. She followed her strong policy agenda which were not even in consensus or backed by the party. This strong view-centric Prime Minister was hard to sway as she held and followed strongly her views. In governments, such leaders are watched closely because they are a disruption to the norm of consensus building leaders or those who follow the rest of the world policies and aspirations. This could be the bubble that is affecting the current United States leadership where everyone is awaiting the next policy decision to be issued; because leadership makes a difference (King,1985).
But let it not be thought that lack of leadership means the end of the road for an organization. Globally, very few organizations lack leadership and maybe it's due to the nature of their operations. Those who are against leadership may state several reasons including the fact that leadership can halt progress in an organization. Where a leader assumes a controlling and micromanaging character, growth is affected automatically. People need to be given the freedom to express their ideas, try new ventures in the current market trends. Leadership can actually curtail that.
Others may well view leadership as just but a directional aspect of an organization. Every organization has a vision and a mission. This means that the first thing any fresh employee interacts with even before joining the organization is the vision and mission. Without the leader, one can well argue that the employee can do acts that will further the vision. Leadership, therefore, can be seen not to make such a huge difference after all. Those who associate leadership with management may also have a different view in that the control part does not necessarily affect the direction of a company. The actions of each and every staff in the organization do make the difference, rather than the leader.
Having evaluated both sides of the debate, it is clear that leadership in one way or the other does make a difference. Even in the remotest of aspects that those who argue against this position, leadership still does make a difference. The difference may be positive or negative or even disruptive. From whichever angle one approaches this debate, however, leadership does matter. The love for order and a belonging to a community necessitates this very fact. Lack of it leads to uncertainty, anxiety and in unnecessary fears among people.
References
Dr. Tom, V. (2016, Dec 29). STRONG LEADERSHIP: DOES IT REALLY MAKE A DIFFERENCE. Retrieved Jan 4, 2017, from Chartered Management Institute: http://www.managers.org.uk/insights/news/2016/december/strong-leadership-does-it-really-make-a-difference
John, M. (2012, March 26). Forbes. Retrieved Jan 4, 2017, from Ten Ways That Leadership Makes The Difference: http://www.forbes.com/sites/prospernow/2012/03/26/ten-ways-that-leadership-makes-the-difference/#2e585c7f1218
Raymond, A. S. (2013, Oct 9). How Belgium Survived 20 Months Without a Government. Retrieved Jan 4, 2017, from Washington Monthly: http://washingtonmonthly.com/2013/10/09/how-belgium-survived-20-months-without-a-government/
King, A. (1985). Margaret Thatcher: The style of a prime minister. The British prime minister, 2, 96-140.
