Donna Ladkin: The Philosophical Approach

Ladkin Book Report

In her book Donna Ladkin approaches leadership from a new approach, the Philosophical approach. This method is highly thought provoking for the reader when trying to grasp the many factors that go into leadership. This thoughtful insight allows for readers to understand leadership from an alternative way of thinking, and in doing so brings out fresh ideas about a well explored, but highly controversial topic of what actually makes a leader a leader. The idea of leaders and leadership has been studied in great detail and many have their own interpretation on the dynamics that go into it. Ladkin seems to provide a more holistic explanation of the topic and thus transforms the previous conventional versions of leadership,
which seem to look at it from a categorizing point of view. Going back to addressing the subject of leadership from a philosophical stance as the first chapter does, Ladkin is effective in the way she constantly questions, confronts and re-opens the ‘traditional’ ways of trying to explain this issue of what actually creates good leadership. Addressing the more dated question of ‘what is leadership?’ she explains that through this approach leadership is defined as an “objectively determined, clear cut way” of thinking. Therefore, Ladkin shifts to the philosophical question of ‘what kind of phenomenon is leadership?’ and in doing so, “evokes a different kind of response”(3). The author understands and emphasizes the notion that society is dealing with complex challenges and is continuously changing and evolving. Therefore, the situations in which leaders are exposed to, and these complex daily challenges they face require new approaches and new forms of leading subject to the situation at hand. The idea of a heroic, masculine, general stereotype of a forerunner is now challenged by a more practical, responsible approach with wise governance in the ever-changing cultures we live in. Instead of not seeing the wood for the trees, Ladkin’s approach allows the surrounding wooded area to be taken into consideration and opens up clearings to see the whole situation. The same way that you “co-intend” the different sides of a cube when looking at it face on, Ladkin encourages one to rotate the cube if you like, and understand that ‘co-intending’ the many other sides isn’t enough anymore and by doing so is “not a route to guaranteed perfect perception” (22). Ladkin invites and incites her readers to further question and interrogate the territory of leadership. The title of the book alone, “A new look at old leadership questions” emphasizes the importance of reassessing the old styles, and bringing a modern view to the issue of leadership. The first few chapters of the book discuss this philosophical reflection on how to study leadership.
There are many well know limitations on leadership and this is apparent in the way there is no clear cut explanation, or theory on the issue. Instead of sticking to the outdated ways of addressing these problems, the author comes at the problem in a different way. She takes insights from Continental philosophy, which questions the “purpose and meaning central to human life.” (1) Although she states that you do not need to be philosophical trained in order to understand the definitions, she recommends “engaging with an open and curious mind”, one piece of advice that when reading is highly encouraged! This continental philosophical approach is introduced in chapter 2 and explains its relevance for leadership research. She describes this approach as one that allows for understanding various sides and perspectives. By engaging with an open and curious mind as she requests, her discussion of leadership can be understood through the different “sides” that are ever apparent in assessing the styles, techniques, traits and characteristics that go into a
leader. One thing the book describes well is that leadership can be taken for granted if not fully understood. People in different roles, and different circumstances are showing leadership skills on a daily basis but the idea of leadership itself can be so distorted that these acts go unnoticed. The idea of ‘Social Construction’ addresses this problem that society has been given meaning by humans and gives them a central role in how to live their lives. The drawback with social construction is that these ideals and concepts such as “liberty, freedom, wealth and leadership” (20) do not have substance or shape and do not exist in material form. As with any concept that is created, they can create a problem when they “remain unquestioned and remain generally accepted”(20). The idea of good leadership is unquestioned, and therefore people believe they will see it and feel it when it is in motion. However, as mentioned, if it goes unquestioned and is taken for granted, when the time comes for the need for leaders to step up, who can verbally express exactly what it is that is required in order for positive change to be made? Without giving the concept substance and taking into consideration all the aspects that go into leadership, then it will continue to be a nothing more than a social construction that only exists through feeling it when you are part of it. Ladkin does a good job at giving the thought of leadership some kind of substance. She includes the followers, the organization and community in which leadership is apparent as also being ‘sides’ of the ongoing leadership cycle. Each description of leadership would be explained from whichever side is being perceived. This idea that there are different perspectives from the different sides that leadership is viewed from demonstrates the complexity of defining leadership. This complexity, when understood allows one to comprehend that each perspective can potentially “provide a new insight into its identity” (31). The author describes that through combining the many ‘pieces’ of leadership that come together and interact, leadership is then enabled to be experienced. The relationship of the leader follower is essential and “together they interact within a particular context and work towards an explicit or implicit purpose” (27). It’s through understanding the combination of everything that goes into and results in leadership that facilitates its presence in the first place. The reason why leadership is so complex is down to firstly, how the followers perceive the context in which they are subject to and secondly, how the leaders respond to this perception. In turn both will result in their actions demonstrating how the situation is being understood and represented. Ladkin emphasizes this recipe of the leadership model describing it as a ‘moment’ in which all the elements come into play. She states that leadership is not something that is ‘whole’ and if it was then it would be able to “operate independently of its context or social construction,”(31) which would perhaps make it easier to define! However, due to the many factors that are present and the different circumstances by which leadership can be perceived, leadership itself cannot exist without the context from which it arises. Ladkin proposes the problem that due to the ever changing, and advancing society the new and continually unfolding study of leadership is difficult to approach at one moment in time.
The main points Ladkin is trying to communicate to the reader is that understanding the topic of Leadership, as mentioned earlier, is not a clear cut topic. She expresses that when we ask questions on the subject at hand it opens up new possibilities in the way we think and expand our interest in learning more about leadership (189).
Perception, how we see things, is a very important matter when it comes to learning about leadership. As mentioned earlier through the example of looking at a cube, we see how certain issues could be looked at differently compared to the angle from which you are looking. The same thing goes for leaders and followers. When leaders declare their perceptions to their followers it provides their focus and attention on the course of action that is presented. On the other hand if the follower see something differently than the leader, they can approach the leader with their point of view which may lead to new ideas and different insights that the leader may not have envisioned.
One thing that Ladkin points out, to go along with perception, is that of the term ‘flesh’. This term refers to the construction in which the leader and follower work. It shows how each one has some type of influence over the other. The prevalence ‘flesh’ has towards leaders and followers is that it shows how one cannot function without the other. They rely on each other to be able to be successful in their line of work (182-83). One of the questions Ladkin proposes is, “How could leaders strengthen the “flesh” between themselves and their followers” (72). This is a very important question to consider when we know that one cannot perform without the other. It is important for them to have a strong bond in order to stay together and be able to work as “partners.” Another main point presented is looking at leadership as ‘moments’ rather than as a ‘whole’. Rather than explain leadership as a “whole” which is clearly distinguishable and independent (25), Ladkin expresses this view point (‘moment’) as a way to look at leadership due to the fact that it cannot be separated within a particular context in which it arises (26). Ladkin wants us to continually stretch our minds with questions as we continually engage ourselves in learning about leadership.
For the most part, as a group, we agreed with most of the conclusions drawn in Rethinking Leadership. One particular concept that we did not agree with was that a function of leaders is to either accept praise for successes or take the blame for failures. Ladkin states, “Leaders serve both as our saviors and as the ones we can call to account when messes are not sorted or prizes not won” (188). In western cultures, it is fairly common to blame leaders for collective failures. As a group, we are not disagreeing with that fact. However, we do not think that this should be the case. Organizations are built upon relationships created between leaders and followers. Without one or the other, a company would undoubtedly fail. As such, we believe both followers and leaders should jointly be responsible for successes and shortcomings. Without followers’ participation, the implementation of organizational decisions will not be promising (Kelly). The leader/follower relationship is one that is interdependent. That being said, it is easy to see why we believe that credit for accomplishments as well critiques for failures should fall on the shoulders of leaders as well as followers. Ultimately, one cannot exist without the other.
Rethinking Leadership has impacted our understanding of leadership in a number of ways.
What stands out the most is that Ladkin approaches leadership from a philosophical point of view. In doing so, she extends beyond the who’s and how-to’s of leadership and instead focuses on the why’s and what-if’s. Many people might ask the question “What is leadership?” Few, however, would ask “How might we understand leadership as a phenomenon?” The latter is exactly the type of question that Ladkin encourages. Overall, she has taught us that there is more than one way to look at leadership and challenges us to let go of our previously held views of the
subject
As Ladkin states in the beginning of her book, “my hope is that much of what is offered here has practical implications for those who find themselves questioning how they might lead more effectively as part of their organizational roles” (3). This book would best suit those who want to go deeper in learning about leadership as it pertains to leaders and followers, also, someone who is inquisitive of the theory(ies) behind leadership.

Works Cited

Kelley, Robert Earl. The power of followership: how to create leaders people want to follow, and followers who lead themselves. New York: Doubleday/Currency, 1992. Print.