Analyse Professor Abell's arguments for seeing strategy and leadership as increasingly congruent, and evaluate his specification of 'the new leader'. The article was written in 2005. Would changes in the business environment since then strengthen or weaken the argument for seeing leadership as the key to strategy? Explain your answer with relevant examples if possible. Please see attachment for complete question.© BrainMass Inc. brainmass.com March 21, 2019, 11:33 pm ad1c9bdddf
Abell (2005) contends, in the opening paragraph of this article, that leadership and strategy are two management functions that are becoming one. While I don't see leadership as a function of management, I do think he offers a strong argument for strategic leadership in organizations today. Many of these arguments are just a pertinent today as they were in 2005, some are even more important. I think leadership and management are two different concepts. Let me be clear, I am not saying that the manager and the leader must be two different people; rather they are two different, distinct roles. Often, these two different roles are filled by one person. In my opinion, management is operational in nature and leadership is more strategic in nature. Leadership is more than strategy and that is one area that I find is a weakness in this article. I will address that weakness later. Leaders, in many instances, drive change in their organizations. This is strategic leadership; leading change to make the organization viable and resilient.
Abell (2005) hints that leadership will be the area where the modern organization either succeeds or fails. According to Abell (2005), ...
This solution is a brief discussion of the attached article.