1. LEADERSHIP AND DISSENT:
A PARADOXICAL TRUTH
Presented by Group 3
1. Shubham Raj
2. Shilpy Kumari
3. Avinab Kumar
4. Rahul Kumar

2. LEADERSHIP
Leadership is the ability to
influence a group toward the
achievement of a vision or
set of goals.
Why we need leaders?
We need leaders to challenge
1. The status quo
2. Create visions of the future
3. Inspire organizational members
to achieve the visions.

3. CHARACTERISTICS OF GOOD LEADER
GOOD
LEADER
Clear goals
Vision
Clear
communication
Expects the best
Support
Encourage
ment
Inspiration
Focus on
team interests
and needs
Integrity

4. 3I’s of leadership
Impact
Inspiration
Influence

5. Follower compliance and conformity
Dissent and resistance
Features of leadership Dynamics

6. LEADERSHIP STYLE
The servant leadership style
is the best suited leadership style
that focuses on supportive and
participative style of
management.
 This leadership style
emphasize on helping
people and fostering a
relationship of trust and
cooperation
It encourages expression of dissenting views

7. WHAT DOES MEAN BY DISSENT?
Dissent is the expression of
disagreement or contradictory opinions
about organizational practices and
policies.

8. NATURE OF DISSENT:
MULTIFACETED AND MULTI-LAYERED
Dissent is
multi-faceted
• It enriches leaders’ surveillance of important issues and
trends
• It helps in pointing out
• Flaws of internal procedures
• Inherent inconsistencies of policy and action
• Unwarranted political hoarding of power in institutions
• Dissent can be a tool for judging the quality of established
practices and policies.

9. Dissent is
multi-layered
To be open to dissent is to
embody and enact trust and
courage.
Embracing dissent underwrites
the shift from authoritarian rule
to maintaining people’s
democratic rights

10. Why true leaders believe dissent is an obligation?
 We can’t have strong leadership without dissent
 Having an “obligation to dissent” we can’t have an effective leader.
 We can get the best minds and the best outcomes if we have an obligation to dissent. People like living
in that environment. They feel valuable & become fearless.

11. DISSENT:BOTHLAUDEDANDLOATHED
Dissent is especially lauded when dissenters emerge
victorious.
Example- Aung san Suu kyi, Aruna Roy
Dissent is loathed when dissenter in the form of
whistle-blowers or leaker speak out in the public
interest.
Dissenter are also ostracized, threatened, harassed,
reprimanded, referred to psychiatrists, demoted,
dismissed and blacklisted.

12. UNWELCOME VOICE
 During April-May 2020 many states in America
was in complete lock down.
 People were protesting for lifting the lockdown
even Elon Musk(Director of tesla motors)
 During that time Presidential elections in America
was approaching.
 For appeasement of certain groups Donald
Trump was ready for giving relaxation on
lockdown rules.
 Trump Administration had come up with new
plan “Open Up America Again”.

13. Dr. Fauci said it will be a suicidal
activity for America if it gives
relaxation in the lockdown rules.
Trump made a statement on social media
that in his next tenure he is going to fire Dr.
Fauci and he is not taking warnings of Fauci
on coronavirus so seriously
Dr. Fauci statement
Repercussion of tussle

14. THE STORY OF A WHISTLE BLOWER
“JULIAN PAULASSANGE”
About WikiLeaks
Julian Paul Assange is founder of WikiLeaks which is an international publishing
organization.
WikiLeaks is known for revealing war crimes, Human rights abuse and Corruption.
 By 2015 WikiLeaks had published more than 10 million documents about many
nations all around the world.

15.  Due to major revelations made by WIKI-LEAKS,
US face a huge humiliation on international forum.
 Assange face false Rape accusation in 2012 by two
Swedish women due to revelation made by him.
Julian Assange took political asylum & spent seven years
(2012-18) in embassy of Ecuador in London.

16. CONCLUSION
Is dissent worth having?
Some level of dissent is necessary to keep an individual, organization or entire society flexible and
responsive to change.
How much dissent is needed?
what is the best way to separate useful from damaging dissent?
No one has come up with a conclusive answer to these questions. The most common strategy is try to pick
which dissent is worthwhile and which is foolish.
Balance is needed: too little dissent risks tyranny and stasis; too much risks chaos.
What is the optimum level of dissent?
To ensure there is a reasonable amount of useful dissent, it is more reliable to protect all non-violent
dissent.