Talking about leadership is not an easy thing. It’s because it does not have any concise and consensus definition on what is it really meant, though we do have scholars who try to explain it from an academic perspective, but still there is no one concrete definition. Also, it’s because it encompasses numerous scopes and dimensions. For instance, leadership is not only about leader trait, talents, and characters, but it also includes the feeling and relationship between leaders and follows outside the scope of the job that both are trying to accomplish. It’s also includes environment in which leaders and follows are living. It’s because environment determines culture and the way of doing things. Thus, in a pluralistic society where people do have different ways of doing things, it cause people to perceive thing differently as well. That’s several reasons why the concept of leadership is hardly defined.
To take a role of leadership, sometime context is really matter. In some society where majority of people is used to authoritarian regime, leadership trend has to be greatly decisive, despotic and firm. In this sense people do not need democratic leader who are likely to collect opinions from all parties. It’s because of many reasons. First, it takes a lot of time to arrive at conclusion. Second, people will fight for their opinions. Third, it will lead to an anarchy. Fourth, they will think that leader is useless and weak. Hence, the leadership is really a dynamic and progressive process in which the leader really have to learn from environment, and other people, and adjust and form a new organizational culture within the work place. So that, some of the objectives might be accomplished with a satisfying outcome.