Modern day leadership style is forged on a template that centres on aspiration, as opposed has obsolete leadership styles that hardly can generate the kind of commitment required in today’s society.
In light of this, leaders should not lose themselves in self-serving thoughts, because people would choose to vote with their energy, determination, loyal to who they can trust with their talents and actions. This is so, because there exist some kind of relationship that is ‘give and take’, far different from the selfish connotation of interests.
To understand this, it is pertinent that cursory look into leadership and its erstwhile relationship with the led is highlighted. Leadership, therefore, is a relationship between those who aspire to lead and those who, by incidences of wishes and choice, choose to follow or be led. In other words, leadership must attend to or be predicated on the dynamics of this kind relationship, if at all it contemplates drawing followership and commitment to their aspirations. Leadership strategies, tactics, skills, and practices tailored at succeeding in this regard may be an exercise in futility, unless it recognizes the ordinate demands of constituents which must be understood and appreciated in clear terms.
What do constituents expect from a leader ?. What does the leader expect from the constituents ?. What purposes do leaders serve ?. Why do people believe in some leaders but not in others ?. Why do some people choose to follow one leader while others reject that leader ?. What actions sustain the relationship ?. What kind of actions/ inactions destroy it ?. These are probing questions that seek to understudy the partnership that ensues in the relationship between a leader and constituents. Answers to these challenges will certainly elevate our understanding leadership and human capital development. Otherwise, our illusions will flourish well in the wilderness of speculations as succinctly captured by John Gardner: ‘A loyal constituency is won when the people, consciously or unconsciously, judge the leader to be capable of solving their problems and meeting their needs when the leader is seen as symbolizing their norms, and when their image of the leader (whether or not it corresponds to reality) is congruent with their inner environment of myth and legend. The people will willingly follow in the direction of a leader who is attuned to their aims and aspirations, worries and fears, ideals and images. The people are the arbiters of the quality leadership they receive from the leader and as such leaders don’t decide who leads.
Followers Do!!!!
FIRST PAGE DAILY REPORTERS 
You must be logged in to post a comment.