Introduction
In this report, I’ll examine Kempster, Jackson & Conroy (2011) with the rest of the set readings to contrast the ethical agentic leadership model. The report examines leadership as social, leadership as purpose, leadership practice, and theory, narcissism and hubris, narcissism, hubris and leadership, narcissism in organizations, Intuition in hubris, negative capability and how it affects leadership, how to develop negative capability, distributed leadership (DL)
Leadership as social
Leadership as a social process is evolving through the communication of actors. Gunzel-Jensen, Jain, & Kjeldsen (2016). This adds up to the idea about heroic versions in leadership research (Uhl-Bien, 2006) as cited in (Gunzel-Jensen, Jain, & Kjeldsen …show more content…
Howie as cited in (Kempster, Jackson & Conroy 2011), argues that ‘the highest good for man consists not merely in the possession [of a purpose] but in the exercise of it . . . Knowledge [of a purpose] merely possessed and not put to use is ineffective and useless’ (1968: 47). And that’s why the reasons to explain why companies have an outstanding performance over a long period of time over their competitors because they have “an enduring sense of purpose” Collins and Porras (1994) as cited in (Kempster, Jackson & Conroy 2011).
To understand the social purpose, we must understand the distinction between external and internal goods (Kempster, Jackson & Conroy 2011). Internal goods are good communities, like promoting health, saving lives, preventing accidents and development of occupational skills. External goods being like gaining power, obtaining money, or winning status. Its possessed by …show more content…
And that what MacIntyre argues about, he says that the managers are agents for spreading this, and they see the exposition of telos and the increase the importance of external goods and the decline in internal goods (Kempster, Jackson & Conroy 2011). But it’s important to know that leaders and followers are deeply influenced by the organizational practices, expectations, and structures that position them in transactional processes that create or produce external
In this report, I’ll examine Kempster, Jackson & Conroy (2011) with the rest of the set readings to contrast the ethical agentic leadership model. The report examines leadership as social, leadership as purpose, leadership practice, and theory, narcissism and hubris, narcissism, hubris and leadership, narcissism in organizations, Intuition in hubris, negative capability and how it affects leadership, how to develop negative capability, distributed leadership (DL)
Leadership as social
Leadership as a social process is evolving through the communication of actors. Gunzel-Jensen, Jain, & Kjeldsen (2016). This adds up to the idea about heroic versions in leadership research (Uhl-Bien, 2006) as cited in (Gunzel-Jensen, Jain, & Kjeldsen …show more content…
Howie as cited in (Kempster, Jackson & Conroy 2011), argues that ‘the highest good for man consists not merely in the possession [of a purpose] but in the exercise of it . . . Knowledge [of a purpose] merely possessed and not put to use is ineffective and useless’ (1968: 47). And that’s why the reasons to explain why companies have an outstanding performance over a long period of time over their competitors because they have “an enduring sense of purpose” Collins and Porras (1994) as cited in (Kempster, Jackson & Conroy 2011).
To understand the social purpose, we must understand the distinction between external and internal goods (Kempster, Jackson & Conroy 2011). Internal goods are good communities, like promoting health, saving lives, preventing accidents and development of occupational skills. External goods being like gaining power, obtaining money, or winning status. Its possessed by …show more content…
And that what MacIntyre argues about, he says that the managers are agents for spreading this, and they see the exposition of telos and the increase the importance of external goods and the decline in internal goods (Kempster, Jackson & Conroy 2011). But it’s important to know that leaders and followers are deeply influenced by the organizational practices, expectations, and structures that position them in transactional processes that create or produce external