Skip Nav

Emphasizing Strengths in Scholarship Essays

Give Your Strengths Magnitude

❶Include details about your role and highlight leadership you provided. First, it goes into much more detail about the work the volunteer did.

Add Variety to Your Strengths

Not what you're looking for?
Choose Your Test
Getting Started With Your Essay

Anyone can become a leader by learning the leadership skills. A leader is someone who stands not only for his cause but takes responsibility and motivates other individuals also. There is a clear difference between being a boss and a leader.

A leader is a motivation for others and inspires individuals to aim high and attain that aim. However a boss only supervises over his subordinates. Power naturally comes to a leader but that power is not a tool of leader. Rather if one tries to control the circumstances with power it turns out to be authoritarian or even suppressive in its expression. A leader showcases a positive attitude and high self esteem. He assertively works towards the goal but never gets pushy for it.

A continuous self study, training, evaluation and imbibing positive things in life develop the characteristics of a leader. Situations are never in our hands but reaction is always that we can control. A leader not only reacts positively but also helps other members of the group to see the brighter side of the picture. In addition, you should show selection committees that you have developed each of your strengths extensively.

Tell them how your accomplishments set you apart from others. Demonstrate the magnitude of your strengths by sharing at least three accomplishments within each category. By expressing the variety of your strengths, you will show that you are a skilled and well-rounded individual.

By expressing the magnitude of your strengths, you will prove that you are accomplished in those areas of your life.

Using power statements to deliver these messages will communicate your value with greater impact to selection committees. These applied techniques will create an essay that is more impressive and persuasive of your qualifications. Topics for Scholarship Essays. How to Strengthen a Scholarship Essay. Emphasizing Strengths in Scholarship Essays Though writing an essay for a scholarship application can be a daunting task, think of it as an opportunity to showcase your abilities and talents to the scholarship committee.

Add Variety to Your Strengths Convince selection committees that your talents and experiences are expansive. Below are examples of how you can emphasize the following strengths: These theories can be distinguished by several historically distinct approaches that focus on either traits, behaviors, situational contingencies, or transformational leadership Gibson, An organization is an interacting network, not a vertical hierarchy.

Effective leaders work throughout; they do not sit on top Mintzberg, While the phenomenon of leadership is widely considered to be universal across cultures, the way in which it is operationalized is usually viewed as culturally specific Dorfman, Definition of leadership Leadership is defined as the process of having dominance on group activities in order to realize the objectives Nazari, Leadership is a sacred trust earned from the respect of others Mintzberg, Many definitions of leadership have been proposed in the literature, but despite differences among them there seems to be some kind of agreement among authors that leadership is a process, involves influence, occurs within a group context, and involves goal attainment Carter, General information on leadership To execute the leadership task, managers try to have influence the people under their supervision and motivate and direct them to achieve the organizational objectives.

Creating motivation in staff in such a way that they do their activity and work in the organization with enthusiasm and reach the goals is very important. This problem with transnational managers who have to create motivation in the individuals with different cultures is more significant.

Five socio-cultural dimensions, identified by Hofstede , The first dimension is called power distance PDI , and is defined as the degree of inequality among the people which a group of people considers as normal.

The second dimension, individualism IND , is the degree to which people prefer to act as individuals rather than as members of groups. Uncertainty avoidance UAI is the degree to which people in a country prefer structured over unstructured situations. Finally, the fifth dimension, long-term orientation LTO , was intended to account for specific traits of many Asian cultures, which were not covered by the first four dimensions Hofstede Since the late s, much of the leadership research has concentrated on characteristics and specific effects of charismatic and transformational leadership Bass ; Kanungo ; Sashkin ; Tichy and Devanna In this study, we used a version of transformational leadership theory formulated by Bass and his colleagues Bass , ; Avolio et al.

According to Bass , transformational leaders motivate their followers by inspiring them, offering challenges, and encouraging individual development. Transformational leadership stresses achievement of higher collective purpose, of common mission and vision.

The second leadership style is transactional leadership. Transactional leaders stress specific benefits that their subordinates would receive by accomplishing agreed-upon tasks. A transactional leadership style involves negotiations between leaders and their subordinates, and exchange relationships between them. Research shows that different behaviors are involved in transformational and transactional leadership. Transactional leadership includes contingent reward CR behavior and management by exception ME.

A series of studies reviewed by Bass support the distinction between transformational and transactional leadership. There is also considerable evidence that transformational leadership is effective, and is positively related to subordinate satisfaction, motivation, and performance Lowe et al. Transactional and transformational leadership styles are contrasted with laissez-faire leadership. Laissez-faire leaders abdicate their responsibility and avoid making decisions Bass b. Subordinates working under this kind of supervisor basically are left to their own devices to execute their job responsibilities.

Although laissez-faire leadership is observed infrequently in the US businesses Bass and Avolio , managers still exhibit it in varying amounts Bass a. Prior research has found that laissez-faire leadership has an adverse effect on work-related outcomes of employees Bass a; Yammarino and Bass Most of the extant leadership research is based on data collected in the North American context Northhouse Regarding leadership styles of German managers, Kuchinke , in his comparison of US and German telecommunications employees, has found that the US respondents ranked higher than Germans on two dimensions of transformational leadership charisma and inspirational motivation.

The majority of studies dealing with leadership styles of managers in Russia are based either on consulting or teaching experience of the authors, or on a limited number of case studies e.

Berger ; Clarke Attempts were made at developing lists of leadership traits or management styles of business people in the transitional economies. For example, a framework developed by Puffer suggests that contemporary Russian managers tend to share power, are inclined to delegate decision making largely to avoid the responsibility for unforeseen consequences , prefer to concentrate on strategic decision making, are tenacious and energetic, and have strong collectivist attitudes.

As in the case of socio-cultural dimensions, literature on leadership styles of managers in the other three countries of the former USSR could not be found. Though not without critics see S?? In this study, however, only three dimensions showed appropriate internal reliability while a fourth approached the generally acceptable level. The construct of uncertainty avoidance, the tendency to fend off ambiguity, proved unreliable and had to be excluded from the analysis, raising questions about the factor structure of this construct.

Far from presenting a homogeneous picture, the four former USSR countries, as might be expected from their history, differed from each other in substantial ways. Georgia ranked lowest with respect to power distance, followed by Russia, Kazakhstan, and Kyrgyzstan. All four countries ranked substantially lower on this dimension than Germany or the US, indicating a much higher level of egalitarianism and the expectation that positions of social power be distributed equally or, at a minimum, be within reach of everybody.

Low levels of power distance are associated with respect for individual equality and power based on expertise and knowledge rather than on position and influence. Low PDI scores further indicate respect for the individual and the recognition of mutual interdependence.

Political power is based on a system of representation and it is accepted that authority be questioned and criticized. Countries with historically low levels of this dimension have included Japan, Canada, the Netherlands, and Great Britain Hofstede The six countries differed less on the dimension of individualism.

Employees in Georgia, who had ranked lowest in power distance, also showed the lowest level of individualism and the highest level of collectivism. High levels on the individualism dimension are associated with an orientation to the self rather than the community, an emphasis on individual initiative and decisions, identity anchored in the individual rather than the collective, and the norms of autonomy, variety, and pleasure as opposed to order, duty, and security.

Masculinity, the tendency to behave in gender-stereotypical terms, was very high in the four SU countries, as was the tendency to plan for the long term rather than focus on short-term results. In highly masculine countries, such as many Latin American and Mediterranean nations, achievement, ambition, and possession are valued highly, and there is a greater centrality of work in the lives of individuals along with higher levels of work stress. In summary, compared to Germany and the US, the four former SU countries differed primarily by a much lower level of power distance, higher levels of masculinity, and much longer planning horizons.

Concerning leadership styles, the fact that contingent reward was much more highly correlated with transformational than the other transactional styles raises a question over the validity of the distinction between the two and where the positive reinforcement factor belongs.

This question has previously been posed in previous research with Austrian and German bank employees Geyer and Steyrer , but no conclusive answer has been advanced to date. This shows that in these countries there is no clear preference for one of two major leadership styles transactional or transformational , and elements of both styles are being used.

Georgia, overall, had the highest scores for all transformational leadership styles. We believe, though, that this finding should be interpreted with caution. In cross-cultural studies, it is often difficult to attribute observed mean differences between country scores to national culture differences, because these differences may be products of methodological artifacts, such as differences in response style van de Vijver and Leung In some cultural contexts especially more collectivistic ones , responses are given in a more socially desirable way to please the researcher Aycan et al.

These problems in cross-cultural studies are minimized to a certain extent by employing data standardization van de Vijver and Leung However, since the standardization approach can also mask important differences between country samples, we opted for not using it in this study.

Further, although the laissez-faire and management-by-exception leadership styles are less prevalent in all four countries of the former Soviet Union than are the other styles, these two styles have received much higher scores here than in the US and Germany.

This suggests that leadership and management development programs developed by Western professionals for the countries of the former USSR should address these styles, making explicit their characteristics and drawbacks, and assisting trainees in correcting associated negative attitudes and behaviors.

For all four countries, socio-cultural dimensions used in this study predicted leadership styles, but accounted for a small portion of variance with the exception of the relationship between the four cultural dimensions and the management by- exception leadership style. This could suggest two possibilities. First, some other factors could have stronger effects on leadership than the socio-cultural dimensions. In contrast to this approach, Triandis and his colleagues proposed that individualism and collectivism are unique constructs and need to be split into separate continua.

This proposition was supported by recent cross-cultural research Earley and Gibson ; Ralston et al. Additionally, both individualism and collectivism may be multifaceted dimensions consisting of more than one component Triandis Further, since the relationships between leadership and national culture dimensions were not that strong, we need to continue the investigation of the interface of leadership and culture on other levels. For example, organizational, industry, and professional cultures could be playing more important roles in shaping the leadership behavior than country-level culture.

Large-scale surveys such as this one are subject to a number of limitations that need to be kept in mind when interpreting the results. First, with all country-level research this study shares the limitation of likely sampling bias. Although measures were taken to reduce measurement error through the use of native-language instruments and local research teams who administered the survey, distortions of the findings due to convenience sampling are likely. Thus, the results reported here represent the respondents and not their countries.

Second, the study did not take into account the political realities of conducting social science research in countries with long authoritarian histories which present the likelihood of further response bias.

Get Best Leadership Articles Fast with Our Academic Writing Service

Main Topics

Privacy Policy

Only You decide whether your custom written essay % meets your requirements and expectations. We are not done with your paper until You are completely satisfied with your paper. We set exemplary customer service.

Privacy FAQs

leadership essays There are two kinds of people in this world, followers and leaders. Followers are the people that never take a leadership role in any activity. However leaders are the ones that use their leadership skills to make a difference in this world, such as presidents, teachers, or even.

About Our Ads

Leadership is defined as ‘the process in which an individual influences the group of individuals to attain a common goal’. The goal is attained by mutual cooperation and cohesive behaviour. A. Essay on Leadership: Meaning, Nature and Importance of Leadership! “Leadership is the quality of behavior of individuals whereby they guide people or their activities in organising efforts” — Chester I. Barnard “Leadership is the ability of a superior to induce subordinates to work with.

Cookie Info

Leadership and Service Initial Encounter Leadership and service are two well-known topics in the world. There are various leaders such as presidents, governors, mayors, and even teachers. As for the service aspect, there is the military, and those that simply serve in their community. An undergraduate essay on leadership describing the qualities and characteristics of a good leader and models of leadership. Leadership Essay - A Good Leader. Print Reference this. Published: 18th May, Leadership Essay Writing Service Essays More Leadership Essays. We can help with your essay Find out more. Essays;.