Governance & Leadership A classic work that reveals a set of differences between nonprofit organizations and profit organizations, compares the characteristics of public and private organizations to find the significant differences regarding the factors environmental, the relation environment / organization and internal structures and processes, all of which results in a set of strategic implications in the definition of the purposes, objectives, and planning, selection of human resources, management and motivation, and in control performance measurement. (Hopkins et al. 2005)

As a complement to the previous study, distinguish a set of factors that differentiate the public and the private. Such factors include: the complexity and ambiguity of goals, organizational structure, the degree of formalization, and the attitudes and values relating to work. (Jehn & Bezrukova, 2004) However, studies by analyzing previously, the authors find that managers public companies considered having goals clear and unambiguous, therefore, which must play in certain periods of time, only these goals do not relate to maximize the value of heritage. (Tung, 2008)

In addition, managers Public companies do not feel that the work environment be informal in nature, but they estimate that there internal processes that companies differ private. Similarly, performing a meta-analysis study the results of organizational change in the public sector compared to private sector. (Jehn & Bezrukova, 2004) The results indicate that in both the private and public sector change organization can be beneficial, but in the sector public organizational readiness to change is slower, due to the formal structure, goals, administrative procedures and systems reward. Also in the private sector intervention which global effects positive individual behavior in the public sector the results generated for intervention in a process of change have greater variability. (Jehn & Bezrukova, 2004)

Leadership in three sectors: Public, private and voluntary

The central point is to recognize that companies nonprofit idiosyncratic differ in relation to for-profit firms. However, studies that have sufficient importance to this situation are relatively few. (Jehn & Bezrukova, 2004) Among the studies that have considered, in the form due, the difference between nonprofit organizations and profit executives emphasize that the profit and nonprofit organizations view conflict as undesirable, but executives nonprofit organizations understand that this is necessary and improves the quality of decision- decisions because it leaves out the needs of different groups. (Jehn & Bezrukova, 2004)

Instead, executive's for-profit organizations underestimate the importance of conflict and try to avoid it. These different perceptions of the conflict are explained by in nonprofit organizations involving multiple interests and the executives of these institutions understand and accept that those interests are expressed through conflict in decision-making. Similarly, in an important work in an attempt to elucidate some possible conditions for success in making decisions, we find that the profit organizations success or, rather, the effectiveness of the decision is associated with the existence of information and means to the implementation of the decision.

In contrast, in the nonprofit organizations success or effectiveness of the decision is linked to the right of the people to participate and also is important reaching agreements and the absence of intervention by senior management profit and for-profit firms. (Hopkins et al. 2005)

In Indeed, states that the difference between for-profit companies and nonprofit organizations profit lies in the way both types of entities develop and evaluate its mission, since nonprofit organizations in the purposes escape the strategic pursuit of profitability economy. It also suggests that, although management teams of nonprofit organizations and for-profit firms have a moral reasoning equivalent, the internal climate each other different teams. (Jehn & Bezrukova, 2004)

In fact, in firms with profit in the decision-making processes strategic members of the senior management team use higher levels of rationality and greater time to resolve their decisions, in contrast to happens in top management teams in the nonprofit organizations. (Tung, 2008)

Understanding the idiosyncrasies of the profit organizations and non-profit is an essential task to measure the effectiveness of such organizations and the impact of leadership style. Consequently, from a theoretical perspective is that institutions need to consider non- profit and, therefore, public organizations have a number of features that make it different from the private firms. (Ely, 2004)

These characteristics determine the impact of the relationship between leadership style and organizational effectiveness. Studies have linked the process of making decisions with the results of decisions have...

However, it is possible to classify the definition and measurement of results of the decision-making in three categories: development of decision, implementation of the decision, and effectiveness of organization. (Hopkins et al. 2005)
In relation to the formulation of the decision, the research focuses on measuring the results of process through the rigor of the decision, the number of alternatives generated, the quality of generated solutions, achieving goals, the value of the decision, among other similar. The implementation of the decision is a visible result the decision making process. (Dahlin et al. 2005)

Now together with variables such as: level of development reached the decision, the commitment, commitment, understanding and acceptance that achieves emotional decision, and the perception of success or failure of the decision, it is necessary to incorporate implementation analysis of other variables such as trust, obedience and social harmony satisfaction with the results. (Dahlin et al. 2005)

For his part, like this work, there research linking the process of making decisions directly and immediately with the effectiveness or organizational performance. (Jehn & Bezrukova, 2004) Among these studies there works where the performance or effectiveness is measured through subjective indicators, indicators and targets combination of objective and subjective indicators. (Hopkins et al. 2005) To illustrate the first case suggests that the participation level manager's environment in the formulation and implementation of strategy relates positively with performance organization. (Ely, 2004) In this research the performance of the organization is measured through a subjective index assesses the overall effectiveness, competitive position, return on assets, and efficiency of operations, the overall financial performance and the rate of growth. (Dahlin et al. 2005)

Along the same lines, it is suggested that the consensus in strategic decision making has implications for organizational performance only when the business strategy is the strategy defined differentiation. For researchers performing the signature comes from the subjective assessment made by Participants research about adaptability of the firm, efficiency, and effectiveness. (Tung, 2008)

In a similar way, it is postulated that a high level of consensus has not so necessary to a good performance of the organization and in this sense, the consensus seems to be a necessary, but not sufficient for the success of the company. (Earley, 2006) In figure 4.1 the authors measured the performance of the organization in accordance with performance relative valuation of the company performance compared to firms operating in the same industry for profitability and sales. (Dahlin et al. 2005)

The leaders of voluntary organizations now find themselves in front local and global situations that did not exist twenty years ago. (Dahlin et al. 2005) Governments Federal and provincial governments and municipalities have made enormous changes. Donor's funds and companies compete with the voluntary sector for leadership. (Horwitz et al. 2007)

Organizations merge or work together in many ways new and exciting. Leaders must make decisions based on ethics. These decisions can affect many other groups or organizations, and it may be that there is no sufficient time to consider all options before making a decision. The people who attended the workshop said that the area of great concern. There must be a "learning culture" in the voluntary sector. (Ely, 2004)

Constantly improve as a person that does not mean that we can learn to function socially to fall better, be more accepted, more often, better valued and admired ... is not doing what people think, nor satisfy them, but if there are 10 roads to get to Rome go for the one that most people like, so you save enemies and win on the road many allies and friends to the couple that much improved image. Y ademas de todo esto probablemente habras elegido el mejor camino. And besides all this you have probably chosen the best path. (Earley, 2006)

In politics this is used constantly, but not always well, in the personal, work ... not about being perfect but a gift of caring image they have on you and a good way to do is make you look like you want it see you. With your friends invite them to something once in a while, let them favors, fun things organized and ultimately let you have pleasant experiences that will make the image they have of you much better thereby have gained much support. In the labor field is kind to the employees, look after, Mimal be tolerant, flexible and watch while increasing performance as a boss you will see friendly and good person and besides that really nothing is more hateful to a boss to be hated at work. (Earley, 2006) Caring for the image would be the opposite, that people look like you're the one you strive to help pitch in and see that you do not intend to gain…