Advertisement

Political Leadership as a Form of Expression of Public Expectations

  • Vladimir Galanov
  • Aleхandra Galanova
  • Katarína Hercegová
Conference paper
Part of the Springer Proceedings in Business and Economics book series (SPBE)

Abstract

The purpose of the article is to identify the specifics of political leadership from the standpoint of morality and the dominant model of the political system in the developed countries of the world. Leadership is a necessary element of the management system of any organized human activity. The leader is the head of the team aimed at fulfilling the common goal. If the goal is directly related to the interests of society as a whole, then such a leader is a political leader. Political leadership becomes possible only if a person expresses the interests of certain groups (segments) of society. But since there is no unity of interests in the society, the leader has a risk of political leadership. Leaders often succeed each other in the course of an acute political struggle due to the organization of the country’s political system. Therefore, no continuity of their political goals is usually possible. The only exception is the political organization of the society in which the leader has the opportunity to remain in office for a period of 10–20 years. The realization of really meaningful social goals is possible only at such terms measured by the life expectancy of generations of people. Short-term performance of the political leader is a political reason for the fact that society develops spontaneously and randomly. Only the long-term functioning of the leader or the continuity of the political goals of successive leaders is the political basis for such social development when society itself manages its development.

References

  1. Badie B (2012) Diplomacy of connivanceе, 1st edn. Palgrave Macmillan, New York, p 203CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bordea E, Manea M, Pelligrini A (2017) Unemployment and coping with stress, anxiety, and depression. Czech J Soc Sci Bus Econ 6(2):6–14.  https://doi.org/10.24984/cjssbe.2017.6.2.1 Google Scholar
  3. Brown A (2016) Political leadership and political power. Polis Polit Stud 1(1):104–120.  https://doi.org/10.17976/jpps/2016.01.00 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Brownlee J (2002) …and yet they persist: explaining survival and transition in neopatrimonial regimes. Stud Comp Int Dev 37(3):35–63.  https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02686230 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Čábelková I, Abrhám J, Strielkowski W (2015) Factors influencing job satisfaction in post-transition economies: the case of the Czech Republic. Int J Occup Saf Ergon 21(4):448–456.  https://doi.org/10.1080/10803548.2015.1073007 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Dogan M (1994) Use and misuse of statistics in comparative research. In: Dogan M, Kazansigil A (eds) Comparing nations: concepts, strategies, substance. Blackwell, Oxford, pp 35–71Google Scholar
  7. Irkhin YV (2011) New aspects of political leadership (On the example of Barack Obama). Soc Humanitarian Knowl 6:130–145Google Scholar
  8. Jankelová N, Jankurová A, Masár D (2017) Effective management and self-government: current trends. Czech J Soc Sci Bus Econ 6(2):21–31.  https://doi.org/10.24984/cjssbe.2017.6.2.3 Google Scholar
  9. Jiroudková A, Rovná LA, Strielkowski W, Šlosarčík I (2015) EU accession, transition and further integration for the countries of central and Eastern Europe. Econ Soc 8(2):11–25.  https://doi.org/10.14254/2071-789X.2015/8-2/1 Google Scholar
  10. Kabachenko AP (2009) History of world politics, 1st edn. Publishing House of Moscow State University, Moscow, p 828Google Scholar
  11. Kane J (2001) The politics of moral capital, 1st edn. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, p 277CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Karvonen L (2010) The personalisation of politics: a study of parliamentary democracies, 1st edn. ECPR, Colchester, p 124Google Scholar
  13. Kazakov MA (2013) Political leadership: the essence and problems of implementing theoretical models in the development strategy of Russia. Regionology 1:4–13Google Scholar
  14. Koudelková P, Svobodová P (2014) Knowledge creation & sharing as essential determinants of SMEs innovation. Int Econs Lett 3(1):12–20.  https://doi.org/10.24984/iel.2014.3.1.3 Google Scholar
  15. Kradin NN (2011) Political anthropology, 1st edn. Logos, Moscow, p 272Google Scholar
  16. Mainwaring S, Perez-Linan A (2013) Democracies and dictatorships in Latin America: emergence, survival, and fall, 1st edn. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, p 353CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Moskalenko V, Yevsieieva I (2015) Effective leadership conflict management in food technology enterprises. Int Econ Lett 4(2):91–102.  https://doi.org/10.24984/iel.2015.4.4 Google Scholar
  18. Parlier S (2000) Adolfo Suares: Democratic Dark Horse. In: Westlake M (ed) Leaders of transition, 1st edn. Macmillan, London, pp 133–155Google Scholar
  19. Shablinsky IG (2004) Political leadership: typology and technology, 1st edn. The New Textbook, Moscow, p 125Google Scholar
  20. Simionescu M, Ciuiu D, Bilan Y, Strielkowski W (2016) GDP and net migration in some Eastern and South-Eastern countries of Europe. A panel data and Bayesian approach. Montenegrin J Econ 12(2):161–175.  https://doi.org/10.14254/1800-5845.2016/12-1/10 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Smith А (1978) In: Meek RL, Raphael DD, Stein PG (eds) Lectures in jurisprudence, 1st edn. Clarendon Press, Oxford, p 610Google Scholar
  22. Wolfers A (1951) The pole of power and the pole of indifference. World Polit 4(1):39–63.  https://doi.org/10.2307/2008900 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Zelenkov MY (2017) Political science, 1st edn. Dashkov and Co., Moscow, p 340Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Vladimir Galanov
    • 1
  • Aleхandra Galanova
    • 1
  • Katarína Hercegová
    • 2
  1. 1.Plekhanov Russian University of EconomicsMoscowRussian Federation
  2. 2.Prague Business SchoolPragueCzech Republic

Personalised recommendations