Why is Authority snubbed by those who most need to develop it?

"Authoritativeness" isn't a dirty word. Yet, for some reason, it creates a bit of intimidation... perhaps because of its strange similarity to the word "Authoritarianism," which not only has a different meaning than the former, but is its opposite.

Boss... leader...?

"Leadership," like "leader," is a very vague term that over time has acquired the contours of something noble, lofty, even semi-divine.

This term is used to distinguish a more inspired and "follower-friendly" to interpret authority from a more unscrupulous, contemptuous and self-referential one.

In reality, leadership is simply a role played by those who take on the task of guiding a group of people towards a goal or objective, regardless of the method they choose to do so.

Like it or not, even Hitler, Mussolini, Stalin, Genghis Khan, Attila, Vlad Tepes and company (so to speak!) were leaders in all respects and even this mania of wanting to create a clear and rigid dichotomy between "boss" And "leader" To relegate everyone to a series of stereotypical behaviors and attitudes is truly wasteful and, above all, adds nothing to the understanding of leadership.

A boss is a leader... and a leader is a boss: everything else is poetry.

Leadership is a task

One can rightly object that any person capable of displaying a certain concrete and confident way of doing things, supported by an uncommon relational ability and a clear and sharp vision of where he wants to go is a natural leader... but then, what we are talking about is not leadership, but rather Authority, and the two things should not be confused.

No matter how talented, solid, and inspired a person may be, they will never be a leader until they find themselves leading others toward a clearly defined and shared goal.

Most likely, if not even certainly, it is his destiny to become one, but just as a painter cannot be called such until he paints, exhibits his works and makes painting his source of income, I repeat and underline, A leader will never be a leader until he takes on the burden of leadership..

The question, therefore, is not whether one is a leader or not, which in no way depends on personality, but rather whether one is an effective leader or not, and effectiveness depends not only on a person's authority, but on their ability to apply it to the activity they are carrying out.

All this to say that it is not on leadership that we should focus, but on the Authority that the person is able to express, and this is why I find it very strange that many leaders treat the issue with an almost ostentatious superficiality.

Also because, when one plays a leadership role (delegated or assumed on one's own, it doesn't matter), there is no alternative to Authoritativeness other than Authoritarianism.

A leadership... in a tight spot

For years I've studied and followed leadership, particularly Authoritativeness, which is its soul, and I've met a few leaders; but leaders who didn't rely on their position to gain followers (Authoritarianism)... frankly, not many.

Of course, it is much easier and quicker to adopt an authoritarian leadership style.

However, it should be remembered that in recent years the level of awareness of a collaborator (or subordinate, in various capacities) has risen significantly, who expects to relate on equal terms with his/her leader, and if he/she does not find in him/her an interlocutor who lives up to his/her expectations, it will now be easier for him/her to abandon the little "boss".

When leadership is driven by constructive and inspired intentions, moving from an authoritarian to an authoritative mode is not only quite easy, but it is also decidedly more profitable from every point of view.

5 Great Reasons to Consider More Authoritative Leadership

These are just some of the reasons why it would be appropriate for a leader to know and adopt an authoritative leadership style.

1. Greater awareness of reality A leader who is out of touch with the true nature of leadership, opting for self-referentiality, is no longer capable of leading effectively. Authority is neither a theory nor one of many. "styles" of leadership that are proposed more for marketing reasons than anything else, but rather the full expression of a leadership aware of the forces and dynamics that the leader can no longer afford to ignore.
   
   
2. Greater inner security - Authority isn't a simple technique to be applied by implementing banal, pre-packaged attitudes studied at a desk, but rather presupposes knowledge of certain dynamics that, once acquired, allow one to move and make decisions without having to guess. This certainly provides a deeper sense of security that further fuels Authority in a virtuous spiral.
   
   
3. A stronger bond with your collaborators - Authoritativeness isn't just a way to demonstrate leadership, it has a powerful emotional impact on those led by the leader, as they feel reassured, understood, involved, and valued. This creates an unbreakable bond with their leader, who they feel is always on their side, even and especially in times of crisis.
   
   
4. Greater management effectiveness Authoritativeness doesn't work on moralistic assumptions, on the "right thing to do"... instead, it works on what works, that is, on dynamics that adhere to our reality, along a path from which there is no deviation. This is why, for example, the authoritative leader knows how to work so effectively with so-called sweet love and tough love, obtaining the best results from them, even in terms of loyalty and respect.
   
   
5. Greater control Leadership cannot exist without control: a leader without control is out of control (as a leader, of course!), which is why all leaders pursue it... but in most cases, resorting to imposition or manipulation. Authority works in exactly the opposite way: it favors a leadership that, thanks to its knowledge of natural systems to assert itself, is already in control and has nothing to prove.
   

Conclusion

Authoritativeness is not a complementary quality of leadership, but it is itsessence and treating it with condescension or even disinterest is a mistake that many leaders pay dearly for, even if they will never admit it.

Learning to be authoritative isn't difficult, but developing the discipline needed to stay aligned with the dynamics that animate systems is a little more so.

Even this, however, should be seen as a reasonable price to pay for a decidedly more constructive shift in one's leadership.

As a leader, have you identified with any of the things in this article?