THE LEADERSHIP AS A DESTINY OF POLITICS

Abstract

The research of the problem of leadership in politics in this paper is predominantly theoretical in order to use the historical-comparative methods and methods of content analysis to determine the method and method of classification of leadership in political science. The paper points out the problems of defining the notion of leadership and differentiation from similar concepts. Special attention is paid to the terms with which leadership is often identified like management. It is noted that in political science the majority of classifications of leadership are based on Weber's classification in traditional, charismatic and rational leadership. In addition, Likert's classification of four categories of leadership styles is very often used - autocratic, benevolent-autocratic, consultative and participative. Important classifications of political leadership have also been examined according to the criterion of mobilization contents and methods, which distinguish between transactional and transformational leadership. The political leadership in public administration that includes state administration, local self-government and public services is a special segment of this research. Also, political leadership in others organizations such as trade unions, NGOs, etc. As the role of leadership, the role of trade unions in a democratic society, which implies the performance of many functions in the field of work, ranging from initiative to direct protection. In addition, as an organization, the trade union participates in the initiation, articulation and realization of the politics of the whole society.

The conclusion is that, regardless of the model of leadership, a modern society can not function without it. Leadership has become an indispensable segment of social, and especially political and economic spheres, because without leadership it would be inconceivable organization of the political and economic system.