Directions: Read the following passage and answer the questions.
There is a great variety of ways in which one individual stands out from others in social situations and in which the one may be said, therefore, to be “leading” the others. So diverse are these ways that any one concept attempting to encompass them all, as “leadership” does, loses the specificity and precision that is necessary to scientific thinking. In general, it is an essential feature of the concept of leading that influence is exerted by one individual upon another, or more commonly that one or few individual influence a large number. Influence, however, is itself a non-specific term. One may be influenced by another’s disapproved-of behaviour to act antagonically toward him or in a direction quite contrary to that he represents or advocates. It is usual in such circumstances to say that one is driven to act thus, rather than led. “Leading” implies a shared direction and this, in turn, often implies that all parties to the leadership relation have a common goal or at least similar or compatible goals; and as Hollander and Julian say, “leaders’ influence suggests a positive contribution toward the attainment of these goals.” Thus, any act of leading implies an inter-individual relationship, and leading is one form of inter-individual influence. Definition of the simplest unit of analysis in leadership as “the act of leading” has led to the identification of four basic elements in the relationship (1) the leader, with the characteristics of ability and personality and his “resources relevant to goal attainment” (Hollander & Julian 1964); (2) the followers, who also have relevant abilities, personality, characteristic and resources; (3) the situationwithin which the relationship occurs : and
(4) the task with which the interacting individuals are confronted. The nature or the leader-influence relationship and the characterization of the act of leading are to be understood in terms of interaction between these four sets of variable.