Leadership for Non-Profit

Introduction

In every nonprofit or socially beneficial organization, leadership is a quintessential element. Although many organizations fit the classification of nonprofit when they are being distinguished from government and commercial counterparts, they are exceptionally diverse in terms of directives, goals, and missions. Each organization has objectives and goals, and the various methods by which these objectives are achieved (or not achieved) are often a direct result of leadership styles and attributes of the people in charge.

Many, if not most of the dominant leadership theories applied to public and business organizations can be applied as well to nonprofit organizations. Along similar lines, leadership traits among CEOs, executive directors, and individual board members entrusted to lead and manage nonprofit organizations also vary greatly, and the methods and techniques they employ in guiding their organizations to achieve tangible outcomes are often related to their personal leadership styles.

Background

There have been many case studies and scholarly articles on leadership traits and qualities in charitable organizations, philanthropic foundations, religious organizations, or other organizations classified as non-profits, yet there is no singular successful leadership theory or practice. To date, each theory offered by leaders and researchers alike has demonstrated both positive and negative attributes. Some of these theories have more success in practice than others, and often, leaders must demonstrate flexibility in displaying their leadership skills, sometimes shifting from one practice to another depending on the situation. This paper will survey literature that has examined the theories and practices surrounding these concepts of leadership and their relationship to the nonprofit sector.

Discussion

Understandings of Leadership

In everyday language, the word leadership is used in a variety of ways, resulting in a myriad of quite different understandings of the same word. A few examples follow:

Position or rank: “The leadership of the organization is made up of six members.”

Status or market share: “The organization has leadership in the industry.”

Direction: “She provided leadership for the initiative.”

Skill or capacity: “He demonstrates strong leadership.”

Activity: “The group engaged in leadership.”

These different understandings can also be distinguished by something someone is (position), something someone has (skill), and something someone does (activity). These are three different concepts that are worth distinguishing. Another significant distinction is the difference between leader and leadership, two concepts and terms often used interchangeably. Whereas a leader is a position or a person, leadership can be viewed as an activity. In addition, while a leader can engage in leadership, it is important to recognize that leaders do not always engage in leadership, and one need not hold the title of leader to engage in leadership.

Reframing this common misconception—that only a leader can do leadership—is important, especially because people who are not in leadership positions can still make a positive difference and contribute to the leadership process. In this paper, leadership is predominantly emphasized as an activity, or something someone does. While there is also a focus on leadership as a capacity, or something has, these skills and capacities are not important if, one does not put them to use. In other ...