Here is the synopsis of our sample research paper on Book Review: "Understanding Leadership" By Gayle C. Avery. Have the paper e-mailed to you 24/7/365.
Essay / Research Paper Abstract
4 pages in length. Like so many other broadly defined words in the English language, the term leadership has such an expansive connotation that many people do not have a firm grasp of its meaning. Gayle C. Avery's Understanding Leadership helps to alleviate both the ambiguity and confusion so often attributed to the word by applying the overall theme of compilation: Condensing the dozens upon dozens of leadership theories into four specific paradigms in order to provide a solid basis upon which they can all be categorized: classical, transactional, visionary and organic. No additional sources cited.
Page Count:
4 pages (~225 words per page)
File: LM1_TLCLdrUndstnd.rtf
Buy This Term Paper »
Unformatted sample text from the term paper:
Gayle C. Averys Understanding Leadership helps to alleviate both the ambiguity and confusion so often attributed to the word by applying the overall theme of compilation: Condensing the dozens
upon dozens of leadership theories into four specific paradigms in order to provide a solid basis upon which they can all be categorized: classical, transactional, visionary and organic. "The
leadership paradigms provide a platform for subsequently highlighting broad differences in behaviours, beliefs, power, processes and applications of leadership. The paradigms are largely based on different underlying assumptions.
This makes them flexible enough to adapt to different circumstances, and reflects many of the ways that leadership can be understood by different groups of people" (Avery, 2004, p. 20).
A particularly pertinent concept in this overall theme is Averys (2004) ability to disassemble the single word "leadership" and piece it back together again with a collection of ideas,
realistic expectations and ethics that create a more defined, reasonable understanding of each sector. This knowledge provides a springboard to being able to look more critically at todays leadership
theories and assess how they may or may not be appropriate for future application in an ever-expanding format that includes such criteria as culture, processes and changing systems. Averys (2004)
attempt to define leadership in its broadest terms can readily be interpreted to mean that lackadaisical direction, for example, can be just as ineffective as overbearing operators when it comes
to motivating for best organizational performance. The real problem in either situation deals with a managers inability to rally the workers together as a cohesive, productive team; instead, the
casual leader allows each person to do what he or she sees fit even if it falls outside the scope of standard organizational approach. There simply is no structure
...