The phenomenon of leadership occurs in every area of society. Each group has its own leader. The same applies to states and large social organizations. Even ancient thinkers thought about the functions and typologies of political leadership. In our material, the main scientific concepts related to leadership in the political sphere will be considered.
The concept of political leadership
The English word leader in translation means "leading" person. It is capable of influencing different persons in every possible way in order to integrate joint life activity. The leader thus satisfies the interests of the individual community.
Political leadership is a personified form of interaction between power and society. Authority plays a big role here. But influence alone is not enough. The pillars of political leadership are the following elements:
- political program;
- ability to influenceconsciousness of the masses;
- active use of political functions;
- use of material resources to implement program settings.
There are many typologies of political leadership. All of them are united by a common predicate, a single basis in the form of influence on the life of society. The types of such influence will be discussed in detail below.
Machiavelli's Theory
Opens the typology of political leadership the concept of the Renaissance. Its author is the famous Italian thinker Niccolo Machiavelli, one of the ideologists of motivational political theory.
The essence of the concept is simple. Machiavelli sees leadership as the basis of leadership. Any desire for power can only be caused by the desire to get rich or gain authority. To suppress his passions, the ruler must understand his people, appreciate their aspirations and ideals.
There are two motives at the heart of people's behavior: fear and love. Understanding these two qualities will help the ruler to form a "technology of stable leadership." It consists in an equal combination of violence and encouragement - "carrot and stick".
Thus, Machiavelli presents the leader as a strong and cunning ruler. His interaction with the people is based on authoritarian principles. The technology of stable government is the first system in the typology of political leadership.
Theory of leadership traits
Specific traits and abilities of a person determine his ability to managesociety. This opinion is shared by Emory Bogardus, Ralph Stogdill and many other sociologists. All their teachings add up to the theory of the traits of a leader.
This is a concept that is relevant to this day, according to which a leader is a person with a certain biopsychological complex. He is characterized by such traits as wit, strong will, competence, ability to predict, external attractiveness and much more.
Some adherents of the theory say that leadership qualities are given to a person from birth. Other thinkers claim to acquire the necessary traits from the outside, and nothing else.
Most recently, the theory of traits was supplemented by a factor-analytical concept. She immediately took an important place in the typology of political leadership. According to the new concept, leadership style is the "second nature" of a person, and it is formed in a phenotypic way, that is, from the outside.
Situational and synthetic theories
A number of sociologists consider leadership as a phenomenon characteristic of a particular situation. Certain circumstances shape a political leader and determine his behavior.
The concept of situationality prioritizes external circumstances over the individual qualities of a person. The very concept of leadership is considered within the framework of natural evolution, and not social or personal development.
The following theory is called synthetic. It provides for the connection of all existing elements: external factors, behavioral traits,specific conditions, etc. This provides a kind of synthesis of a variety of phenomena - natural and social.
Synthetic theory has not yet been fully developed, but already takes pride of place in the concept and typology of political leadership.
Theories of motives and constituents
Motivational theory considers leadership as a combination of various motives. In the typology of political leadership, the essence of such motives is determined by the behavior of the leader's followers. For example, they may be more or less motivated to follow the orders of their patron. At the same time, motives directly depend on the behavior of the leader.
The theory of constituents is widely used in developed democracies. According to this concept, the leader must be elected by the people - the constituents. Only they are able to give power to the person they like the most. The considered political concept in the typology of political leadership and domination is the most relevant and justified.
Psychological theories
Psychologists have been studying the phenomenon of leadership for a long time. The most striking illustration of the operation of this trait is the political sphere. The familiar Sigmund Freud laid the foundation for the formation of a psychological typology of political leadership. It will not be easy to summarize his theory. In any case, it is associated with the suppression of libido. Unconscious sexual desire is sublimated into different spheres. Someone in work, in creativity, andanother in leadership.
Freud's theory is still too idiosyncratic. There is no clear evidence of the concept under consideration. Because of this, psychologists began to offer their own explanations for such a phenomenon as political leadership.
The theory of violence as a manifestation of weakness has become widespread. Any authoritarian regimes, psychologists argued, are caused by an unhe althy state of mind of the leader and his people.
Most psychological concepts are aimed at identifying the special features of such a phenomenon as political leadership.
The concept, typology and functions of leaders
Walfredo Pareto divided the leaders into "lions" and "foxes". Foxes do not act in a straightforward manner, often look for workarounds and are generally very cunning. Leos are more assertive and authoritarian. They are ready to achieve their goal by any means. This is a simple but very accurate classification. Pareto answers the question of who are political leaders. These are public managers using various methods of leadership and manipulation.
Berne divided the leaders into converters and businessmen. The former think globally and work for the benefit of society. The second focus attention on the details, as they think subjectively. Because of this, dealers are less loved than converters.
Polish sociologist Jerzy Wyatr divided leaders into pragmatists and idealists. The first express the public will, the second care about the preservationinfluence.
Finally, Max Weber viewed leaders as traditional and rational-legal. The first, as you might guess, follow the traditions. Their rule has sacred features, and power is inherited. Faith in God and the leader's charisma play an important role. Rational-legal leaders are elected by the population. Their relations with the masses are much simpler and more productive.
Functions of political leaders
Despite the many forms of leadership, the functions of the people's leaders are always the same. This is the preservation of statehood and concern for the well-being of the population. Sociologists have been able to classify the responsibilities of leaders.
The following groups of functions were formed:
- Orientation. A certain political course is supposed to be developed.
- Integrative. Reconciliation of different interests, values and ideals to unite different social groups.
- Mobilization. Necessary when making profound changes in society.
- Communicative. Aimed at ensuring a sustainable form of self-organization by maintaining close contact with the public.
- Legitimization of the existing system. Aimed at securing popular support.
The implementation of each group of functions will help preserve the existing state regime.
Political leadership in modern Russia
It is unlikely that anyone will deny that Russia is a country of political leaders. There is no absolute democracy in the stateentrenched, and each ruler has a very wide range of powers. This trend continues to this day.
One has only to highlight a few features that are characteristic of our time:
- Institutionalization. There are attempts to disguise idealistic leadership as a form of presidency.
- Professionalization of political government - consolidation of powers in law, the emergence of popular sovereignty as a guarantor, and so on.
- Weakening of positions of regional leaders. In modern Russia, the institution of local elections is gradually disappearing. Increasingly, local heads are appointed by a central "ruler".
The above features do not give a clear idea of where exactly Russia is moving. There are many versions. Some of them will surely turn out to be true.
