Although motivation lies in the subjective and objective features of an environment where people live and stay, contrasting examples of the degree of peoples’ motivation often exist within the same social structure. Love, care, and kindness are the most typical leadership traits; however, these qualities are sometimes less effective in some odd societies. Many people may look at leadership modesty as weak and incompetent. Those people often adore the lion for its ferociousness and dominating image. They do not value a compassionate and docile tiger. Similarly, some people are better responsive to autocratic, dominant, and demanding leaders. Despite having so much atrocity caused, Adolf Hitler is still sometimes admired by a few people due to his enormous capacity to control his military. Indeed, people possess different mindsets, loyalty, and obedience from society to society depending upon their education, life values, mental habits, consciousness, and, more significantly, self-esteem. Living within the same community, some people possess a stronger sense of accountability than others. Even living in the same neighborhoods or family, the degree of positive motivation sometimes differs considerably from one to another. Some are more self-centric than others, whereas many are selfless in their commitment. In some societies, people are also found with unwarranted expectations, and they suffer from constant anxiety, dissatisfaction, and unhappiness; thus, they fail to reciprocate good conduct to others. Leaders in such societies pass through enormous challenges to move their followers and often adopt rigid policies. Eventually, the leadership environment suffers from an appropriate level of positive motivation.
There may be a diverse cause behind such an unexpected social structure. Living and struggling through prolonged social deprivation may lead to poor self-image and lower self-esteem. It may also be the outcome of an environment where people are habituated to live through aid, gifts, and charity. When people receive assured facilities, amenities, or provisions without much effort, they may be unthankful. When people become habituated to living on charity and aid, they lose their willpower to work, innovation, and self-esteem. When some social practices fail to protect and enhance self-esteem, people may engage themselves in different types of disrespectful behaviors. People may become betrayers, bribe-taker, or ill-willed in such a situation if the social climate fails to encourage value-based living. People of such societies often engage in widespread dishonesty, self-centric behavior, and public misconduct. People’s behavior in those communities often becomes unpredictable and irrational, lacking a particular pattern or categorization. Leadership suffers enormous challenges with such followers and reaching some leadership objectives. A leader may not be significantly successful in bringing something good to such a society or organization within the short term. Due to diverse degrees of mental alignment, the satisfaction threshold among people varies greatly. Due to unwarranted expectations of followers, leadership often fails to create a conducive social or organizational climate. The meta-level analysis of such human behavior may link to long-term social deprivation caused by rulers, social elites, and even repressive social customs. It is often found that societies with past traumatic experiences by the colonial rules or repressive regimes lack self-esteem, creativity, and social order. Conversely, organizations with rich history are often found self-ruled, disciplined, and live with a strong sense of self-esteem. A long term strategic social development scheme is essential to address these critical issues.
A Suitable Context Is Essential
We value the importance of light when we pass through dark nights. A glass of water becomes highly prized when thirsty but running short of drinks. Appropriate context makes leadership effort valuable and effective; conversely, an excellent endeavor cannot impact significantly if the context is not ready. George Washington’s critical role in the context of the Revolutionary War in the United States led him to receive the title “Father of His Country.” The context of the collapsed justice system in South Africa created one Nelson Mandela. Indeed, the necessity of appropriate context is vital for any leadership success. Therefore, leaders need to build emotional contexts so that people recognize the conditions of the new dream. It is indispensable to create an organizational climate where people should seek combined glory and shared values. A context is critically essential so that people are constantly engaged in protecting their own self-esteem, values, and recognition. A context is necessary so that people can value the importance of kindness, compassion, modesty, and the needs of essential human qualities of a leader. Such contexts may be created by social norms, beliefs, and the promulgation of certain authorities where rules, standards, and customs are strict. If the rules are rigid and robust, leaders have the scope to exercise their human qualities and leadership traits. Conversely, if the social rules, norms, and policies are weak, flexible, and fragile – leaders have less scope to display their qualities, win people, and attract them to the expected vision. Therefore, leadership demands a continuous nurturing of the context where trust, self-esteem, and values can naturally grow.