the negative side effects of the social change model

There are many different theories that all apply to leadership. We have looked at some of these major theories in class including the Process theory. This theory states that leadership is a process that includes meaningful engagement of both the leader and the follower. This theory includes three models: the social change model, the relational model, and the Tao meditation model. In this blog, I will be focusing on the social change model and how it affects our society.

                Social change is a term that explains the concept of change big or small that is beneficial to society. Though this term is supposed to result in changes that will benefit society, it could be taken out of concept by some and result in disastrous results.  A perfect example for this would be WWII. Hitler had a great idea and plan to lead a social change in Germany, but this idea lead to one of the greatest war in world’s history. This idea would have been great if it had been placed in the hands of the right individual, it would have maybe resulted in Germany reforming its government to becoming one of the greatest governments today. This example was given to illustrate that though change is usually great, the social change could be interpreted wrongly someone.

                But why is there a wrong interpretation? What is it about the social change model that could flare negatives thoughts into an individual’s mind? If the model seeks to bring out positive changes, why have there been some negative results from individuals wanting change. In my opinion, I think the name ‘social change’ could be the reason for the sometimes negative results of social change. The urban dictionary defines social change as “a sociological term that involves alterations in basic structure of a social group.” The key word from this definition is alteration, which could be interpreted by some individuals as drastic change that alters the lives of individuals, not necessarily in a good way. When I first saw this name, I thought of a drastic social event that impacts and changes the lives of individuals. Immediately I saw the negatives of such a name. I realized that the name was so powerful; it could leave the wrong connotation in someone’s mind. It could relate to a mass killing that alters and changes the community and its individuals, but not necessarily in a g.ood way. An example close to home is the mass killing of the individuals in Tucson. The young man Jared loughner believed he was out to make a social change in Americas political system, but he used a more traumatic and unappealing approach that greatly impacted and caused a change in the Tucson.

                Though social change is a good, positive model that every leader needs to know, I believe that it needs more clear definitions and method required to achieving these changes. There are still some loose end in this model that needs to get tighten because it could be wrongly interpreted and result in a negative social change.