Managers and Leadership Style

“Managers Should Adapt Their Leadership Style To Particular Situation And People. ” To What Extend Do You Agree With This Statement? Along with the development of business, management becomes more and more important in modern commerce. Although there is not an exactly defining of management, the managers are still regarded as a responsibility of getting things done though other people (Hall, 1993). According to Hall, it is clear that manager’s job is involving dealing with other people. Also, Henri Fayol(Fayol,1993,P412)suggest that:

Management is about planning, organizing, coordinating, commenting and controlling. Therefore, there is no doubt that in normal cases, manager should face and deal with different situations. From what has been mentioned above, it can be drawn conclusion that management is not only a linkage to people but also to particular situations. Leadership is a part of management. Dave Needham (Needham, 1999, P236) makes an important defining: Leadership is the process of motivating other people to act in particular ways to meet organization’s objective. It is simple to that leadership combines to both people and situation.

Managers always examine four styles of leadership, which are autocratic, democratic, paternalistic and laissez-faire, in order to identify leadership to suit different situation and people. Thus some people wonder that whether the manager should adapt their leadership style to particular situation and people. To my mind, I largely agree that a good manager should adapt their leadership style to different situation and people. As society develops, the best style of management begins to depend on several external factors, such as personalities of staff (Marcouse, 1999).

Nowadays, business needs different type of employees, which have different work personality so that run companies more efficient. The difference of their backgrounds leads that different subordinates respond different leadership style. In my opinion it is a good reason, because it makes both manager and staff more effective. Imaging there is a manager who is generally democratic. If subordinates are good training, the manager would always discuss with them or even ask for their ideas as decision making.

This manager would like to keep democratic style, otherwise, he will lost several valuable idea from those self-motivated staff. If the subordinates are lazy, the manager would just tell the staff what to do in order to improve the efficiency of business. It is see that the manager must change leadership styles from democratic to autocratic in case of staff don’t work hard enough. Change will take place if employees work without confidence as well. To suit this particular employee, the manager would like to treat them as family members and tries to guide them.

The manager changes the leadership style into Paternalistic to try to contribute the confidence for subordinates. If the subordinates are hard-working, the manager will prefer to give them more freedom to do decision making. The manager must change democratic to laissez-faire, because hard-working employees will word more effective with enough freedom. With these discussions above, I agree that managers should adapt their leadership style in particular people in order to manage their business more successful.

In addition, contrasting with each of leadership styles, several similarities are exist among them, such as both autocratic and democratic are manager tell staff how and what to do next. However, different subordinates respond differently. Some respond the boss style who will be efficient in autocratic. Some would like to democratic because they like family style. I believe this is another good reason to support that a good manager should adapt their leadership style to satisfy particular people.

Situation is also an important factor to change manager’s leadership style. Along with the rapid development of society, globalizations have taken place all over the world. The business begins to meet so many different customers that face to different problems in recent years. Compared with a few decades ago, the situation become remarkably changes. In modern society, the situation of enterprise changes all the time. Assuming a business has a manger who is democratic, and almost every subordinate respond his leadership style.

If in a period of time, the sale of products sharply decline, the manager have to set up specific objective in order to pull up the sale of products, in this special situation, the manager must adapt has leadership style form democratic to autocratic in order to business can be completed effective(Whitcomb, 1986). If, however, the sales of products increase in a period, the manager would release more rights to employees. As a result, manager should changes his leadership style into laissez-faire, which means subordinates make almost all the decision.

Different product would lead to the change of leadership style as well. For instance, a company, which produces medicine, should be autocratic. The major reason is that the products are exactly the same so that there is totally no need for manager to discussion with staff. However, if the company tent to produce toy, the manager should turn their leadership style into democratic due to predict the variety market. Therefore, it is not difficult to come to the conclusion that the leadership style should be changed to suit the variety situation in modern society.

On the other hand, despite the many evidences which confirm that the leadership style should be adapted to satisfied particular situation and people, there are still some reasons that the manager shouldn’t change the leadership styles. F. Fieler(Fieler,1999,P447)argued that. “It is easier to change someone’s role or power, or to modify the job he has to do, than to change his leadership style. ” Accord Fieler’s argument, it’s simple to conclude that some manager shouldn’t change the leadership style because it may cause the low productivity for the manager.

As different leadership styles are effective with the suitable situation, when leaders unable to change the leadership style in case of causing low productivity, the only way to achieve the effectiveness is adapt work to management (Dave Hall, 1993). Another important reason that manager shouldn’t change the leadership style is the number of staff. Image a manager of a public limited company, as there are too many staff then every subordinate respond different leadership style, therefore, it’s impossible for manager to change leadership style to satisfy everyone.

The manager in this situation should choose the most productivity leadership style which most subordinates can respond. To sum up, although adapt the leadership styles has its advantages, it also has its negative effects. However, with the development of global economic, managers should adapt their leadership styles to suit situations and people, because of situation and subordinates become totally different from last decades. This change of the opinion of management will lead a variety and specific leadership style, which make subordinates work more effective, become a new current in the later decades.

Read more

Finding Your Signature Leadership Style

Table of contents

There’s no single definition of what it means to be . In 2000, Daniel Goleman published a that uncovered leadership styles and examined their effect on office culture and bottom-line profitability.

Goleman concluded that there were six types of leaders:

  • Coercive leaders demand immediate compliance.
  • Authoritative leaders mobilize people toward a vision.
  • Affiliative leaders create emotional bonds and harmony.
  • Democratic leaders build consensus through participation.
  • Pacesetting leaders expect excellence and self-direction.
  • Coaching leaders develop people for the future.

So how do you ? According to Tim Fortescue, a senior coach and account director at, there’s no one box that you should put yourself into. Styles can mix and anyone can grow to be an effective leader. “Great leaders come in all different molds,” he says “I think it’s something anyone is capable of adapting themselves into.”

Through Own The Room, a company that helps people refine their presenting and leadership skills, Fortescue has worked with everyone from top executives to entry-level hires. It’s no surprise, then, that he’s seen a lot of along the way. He spoke to The Venture about how people can find and develop their own signature style in becoming a productive leader.

Get a Head Start

You don’t need to be in a leadership position to start developing your unique style, Fortescue says. “Probably the best way to practice running an organization before you and what your values are, and live them in your daily life,” he explains. “Defining those things early sets people up for success.”

As soon as you’re in a position of leadership, you’ll likely have to start making tough decisions right away. That’s why it helps to have a clear idea of what’s most important to you. Plus, your staff will appreciate your clarity and ability to never second guess yourself.

Be Clear About Your Expectations

Remember: you will likely have to adapt your leadership technique based on the situation you’re in. For example, if you’re in a crisis environment, a strong voice may be the most effective approach. On the other hand, if you’re working on a long-term project that you want your team to be invested in, you may choose to take an approach that focuses on team building and giving staffers a feeling of ownership. Whatever the case, an important thing to do right off the bat is to communicate your expectations to your team. If your staff knows what you want out of them, that will give you the freedom to find the technique that best fits the situation, and have it be effective.

Fortescue finds that setting some non-negotiable boundaries is key in . “I’m as flexible as I can be when it comes to individual style,” Fortescue says. “But in terms of standards and certain structural orders, that’s where I hold firm. I think that allows for people to play to their strengths.”

Know When To Let Go

If you’ve ever had a boss who holds the reins too tight, you know it can lead to a frustrating work environment. No matter what style you adapt, there are times when the most effective thing to do is to . Fortescue recommends that figuring out the right moments to give your team some freedom is an important leadership exercise. “In order to be successful as a team, you have to let your players have autonomy, be themselves, explore, try and fail,” Fortescue says. “Once they know where their boundaries are, then letting them go is the key to success.”

Fortescue acknowledges that giving your team that kind of freedom can be a bit scary, particularly if you’re running a small business, but he suggests taking the leap of faith. “More often than not, I’ve found that people surprise you with the good work they do when you give them autonomy, as long as they understand what the expectations are,” he says.

Read more

Leadership Style Argumentative Essay

Definition of Leadership A leader is someone who can influence others and who has a managerial authority. Leadership is what leaders do. More specifically, it’s the process of influencing a group to achieve goals. Group Leadership Leadership is concerned with control and power in a group. Leadership can be aimed at either maintaining the interpersonal relationships in the group or prodding the group to achieve its task. Kinds of Leadership Groups typically benefit from two kinds of leadership i. e. Instrumental leadership Expressive leadership Instrumental Leadership:

This kind of leadership refers to group leadership that focuses on the completion of tasks. Members look to instrumental leadership to make plans, give orders and get things done. Characteristics of instrumental leadership Instrumental leaders usually have formal, secondary relations with other group members. They give orders and rewards and punish members according to their contribution to the group’s efforts. Enjoy more respect from members when successful. Their main goal is completion of task. Expressive Leadership: Expressive leadership is a group leadership that focuses on the group’s well being.

Example: the democratic style of leadership is an example of expressive leadership. Characteristics of Expressive leadership Expressive leaders take less interest in achieving goals than in promoting the well-being of members, raising group morale and minimizing tensions and conflicts among the group members. Expressive leaders build more personal and primary ties. They show sympathy to their group members. They generally receive more personal affection. Leadership Styles Definition: Leadership styles refer to the various patterns of behavior favored by leaders during the process of directing and influencing workers.

Sociologists describe leadership in terms of decision making styles. The three major types of leadership are the following: Authoritarian or autocratic leadership. Democratic or Participative leadership. Laissez-faire leadership. Although good leaders use all three styles, with one of them normally dominant, bad leaders tend to stick with one style. In the past several decades, management experts have undergone a revolution in how they define leadership and what their attitudes are toward it. They have gone from a very classical autocratic approach to a very creative, participative approach.

Somewhere along the line, it was determined that not everything old was bad and not everything new was good. Rather, different styles were needed for different situations and each leader needed to know when to exhibit a particular approach. Authoritarian Leadership This is often considered the classical approach. It is one in which the manager retains as much power and decision-making authority as possible. The manager does not consult employees, nor are they allowed to give any input. Employees are expected to obey orders without receiving any explanations.

The motivation environment is produced by creating a structured set of rewards and punishments. This style is used when leaders tell their employees what they want done and how they want it accomplished, without getting the advice of their followers. Some of the appropriate conditions to use it are when you have all the information to solve the problem, you are short on time, and your employees are well motivated. This leadership style has been greatly criticized during the past 30 years. Some studies say that organizations with many autocratic leaders have higher turnover and absenteeism than other organizations.

These studies say that autocratic leaders: Rely on threats and punishment to influence employees. Do not allow for employee input. Autocratic leadership is not all bad. Sometimes it is the most effective style to use. These situations can include: New, untrained employees who do not know which tasks to perform or which procedures to follow. Effective supervision can be provided only through detailed orders and instructions. A manager’s power is challenged by an employee. Democratic or Participative leadership

The democratic leadership style is also called the participative style as it encourages employees to be a part of the decision making. The democratic manager keeps his or her employees informed about everything that affects their work and shares decision making and problem solving responsibilities. This style requires the leader to be a coach who has the final say, but gathers information from staff members before making a decision. Democratic leadership can produce high quality and high quantity work for long periods of time. Many employees like the trust they receive and respond with cooperation, team spirit, and high morale.

Typically the democratic leader: Develops plans to help employees evaluate their own performance. Encourages employees to grow on the job and be promoted. Recognizes and encourages achievement. Like the other styles, the democratic style is not always appropriate. It is most successful when used with highly skilled or experienced employees or when implementing operational changes or resolving individual or group problems. This is normally used when you have part of the information, and your employees have other parts. Note that a leader is not expected to know everything — this is why you employ knowledgeable and skillful employees.

Using this style is of mutual benefit — it allows them to become part of the team and allows you to make better decisions. Laissez-faire leadership Laissez faire is a French word meaning noninterference in the affairs of others. Laissez means to let, allow and faire means to do. The laissez-faire leadership style is also known as the “hands-off? style. It is one in which the manager provides little or no direction and gives employees as much freedom as possible. All authority or power is given to the employees and they must determine goals, make decisions, and resolve problems on their own.

In this style, the leader allows the employees to make the decisions. However, the leader is still responsible for the decisions that are made. This is used when employees are able to analyze the situation and determine what needs to be done and how to do it. You cannot do everything! You must set priorities and delegate certain tasks. This is an effective style to use when: Employees are highly skilled, experienced, and educated. Employees have pride in their work and the drive to do it successfully on their own. Outside experts, such as staff specialists or consultants are being used.

Employees are trustworthy and experienced. Varying Leadership Style While the proper leadership style depends on the situation, there are three other factors that also influence which leadership style to use. The manager’s personal background. What personality, knowledge, values, ethics, and experiences does the manager have? What does he or she think will work? The employees being supervised. Employees are individuals with different personalities and backgrounds. The leadership style managers use will vary depending upon the individual employee and what he or she will respond best to. The company.

The traditions, values, philosophy, and concerns of the company will influence how a manager acts. There are a lot of arguments for and against each of the effective leadership styles. For example, the followers of an authoritarian leader are more prone to having low motivation and morale. They may find it difficult to get inspired because the leader is more impersonal, task oriented, demanding, and not considerate of their opinions. However despite this, there are situations where an authoritarian leadership style is the most effective. Such as when time is short, when the leader has all the information and a quick decision is needed.

Anything other than an authoritarian leader will result in poorer outcomes. Theories of Leadership People have been interested in leadership since they have started coming together in groups to accomplish goals. However, it wasn’t until the early part of the twentieth century that researchers usually began to study it. These early leadership theories focused on the leader (trait theories) and how the leader interacted with his or her group members (behavioral theories) while subsequent theories looked at other variables such as situational factors and skill level.

While many different leadership theories have emerged, most can be classified as one of eight major types: ‘Great Man’ Theory Early research on leadership was based on the study of people who were already great leaders. These people were often from the aristocracy, as few from lower classes had the opportunity to lead. This contributed to the notion that leadership had something to do with breeding. The idea of the Great Man also strayed into the mythic domain, with notions that in times of need, a Great Man would arise, almost by magic.

This was easy to verify, by pointing to people such as Eisenhower and Churchill. The term “Great Man” was used because, at the time, leadership was thought of primarily as a male quality, especially in terms of military leadership. Trait theory In searching for measurable leadership traits, researchers have taken two approaches: Comparing the traits of those who have emerged as leaders with the traits who have not and Comparing the traits of effective leaders with those of ineffective leaders.

Early research on leadership was based on the psychological focus of the day, which was of people having inherited characteristics or traits. Attention was thus put on discovering these traits, often by studying successful leaders, but with the underlying assumption that if other people could also be found with these traits, then they, too, could also become great leaders. Trait theories often identify particular personality or behavioral characteristics shared by leaders. But if particular traits are key features of leadership, how do we explain people who possess those qualities but are not leaders?

This question is one of the difficulties in using trait theories to explain leadership. Behavioral theory When it became evident that effective leaders did not seem to have a particular set of distinguishing traits, researchers tried to isolate the behavior characteristics of effective leaders. In other words, rather than try to figure out who effective leaders are, researchers tried to determine what effective leaders do i. e. how they delegate tasks, how they communicate with and try to motivate their followers or employees and so on.

Behaviors, unlike traits, can be learned, so it is followed that individuals trained in appropriate leadership behaviors would be able to lead more effectively. Participative theory A Participative Leader, rather than taking autocratic decisions, seeks to involve other people in the process, possibly including subordinates, peers, superiors and other stakeholders. Often, however, as it is within the managers’ whim to give or deny control to his or her subordinates, most participative activity is within the immediate team.

These leaders encourage participation and contributions from group members and help group members feel more relevant and committed to the decision-making process. In participative theories, however, the leader retains the right to allow the input of others. The level of participation may also depend on the type of decision being made. Decisions on how to implement goals may be highly participative, whilst decisions during subordinate performance evaluations are more likely to be taken by the manager.

Contingency theory Contingency theories are a class of behavioral theory that contends that there is no one best way of leading and that a leadership style that is effective in some situations may not be successful in others. Contingency theories of leadership focus on particular variables related to the environment that might determine which particular style of leadership is best suited for the situation. According to this theory, no leadership style is best in all situations. Success depends upon a number of variables, including the leadership style, qualities of the followers, and aspects of the situation.

This theory focuses on the following factors: Task requirement. Peer’s expectations and behavior. Employees’ characteristics, expectations and behavior. Organizational culture and policies. Situational theory One of the major contingency approaches to leadership is Paul Hersey and Kenneth H. Blanchard’s “situational leadership model” which holds that the most effective leadership style varies with the “readiness” of employees. When a decision is needed, an effective leader does not just fall into a single preferred style, such as using transactional or transformational ethods. In practice, as they say, things are not that simple. Factors that affect situational decisions include motivation and capability of followers. This, in turn, is affected by factors within the particular situation. The relationship between followers and the leader may be another factor that affects leader behavior as much as it does follower behavior. The leaders’ perception of the follower and the situation will affect what they do rather than the truth of the situation.

The leader’s perception of themselves and other factors such as stress and mood will also modify the leaders’ behavior. Transformational or Charismatic theory Working for a Transformational Leader can be a wonderful and uplifting experience. They put passion and energy into everything. They care about you and want you to succeed. One area of growing interest is the study of individuals who have an exceptional impact on their organizations. These individuals may be called “charismatic” or “transformational” leaders.

First, many large companies including IBM, GM etc have embarked on organizational “transformations” programs of extensive changes that must be accomplished in short periods of time. Bass’s theory of transformational leadership Bass defined transformational leadership in terms of how the leader affects followers, who are intended to trust, admire and respect the transformational leader. He identified three ways in which leaders transform followers: Increasing their awareness of task importance and value. Getting them to focus first on team or organizational goals, rather than their own interests.

Activating their higher-order needs. Bass has recently noted that authentic transformational leadership is grounded in moral foundations that are based on four components: Idealized influence Inspirational motivation Intellectual stimulation Individualized consideration Transactional or Management theory Management theories (also known as “Transactional theories”) focus on the role of supervision, organization, and group performance. These theories base leadership on a system of reward and punishment. Managerial theories are often used in business; when employees are successful, they are ewarded; when they fail, they are reprimanded or punished. The early stage of Transactional Leadership is in negotiating the contract whereby the subordinate is given a salary and other benefits, and the company gets authority over the subordinate. When the Transactional Leader allocates work to a subordinate, they are considered to be fully responsible for it, whether or not they have the resources or capability to carry it out. When things go wrong, then the subordinate is considered to be personally at fault, and is punished for their failure (just as they are rewarded for succeeding).

Read more

Leadership Styles Critique Essay

Leadership Styles Henry Emenanjor LDR 531 February 15, 2010 Leo Maganares Introduction Leaders are born or made; this can be interpreted as follows: “Are Leaders actually Born or Made? Very interesting question, there are present leaders on planet earth including past leaders for examples the Great Napoleon of France, Regan of United States of America, Margret Thatcher of great Britain whom seem to be naturally endowed or have the ability to lead others while others can become leaders by concentrating on a particular leaderships skills.

Leaders are said to be inspirational, possesses combination of attribute such as great personalities and great skills which gives direction and ultimately makes people want to listen and follow their lead. Leaders varies from people to people likewise the era in which that leaders existed, basically an effective leadership can be influence by time, culture , the people, need etc. Great leaders have one thing in common; they are confidence and make people believe in them especially their ideals.

Great leaders either present or past have different leadership styles and these styles can be defined as the process of providing direction for followers or individual, setting goals , ability to implement those set or proposed goals and ultimately motivate the people to achieve such goals ( Kurt Lewis 1939). There are different factors or approaches toward effective leadership, the styles each leader uses depend on combination of their: Belief, how confidence they are and abilities to motivate their followers. The second factor is their Values: Believe individual processes about ways of life and individual characteristics.

Values are a set of emotional rules, feeling and governing characteristic that individual follow in about life and ability to implement those decisions in right directions. (H. Emenanjor, 2010). The third factor is the Organizational culture: Every successful organization has a solid base of personalities or cultural values, these cultural behaviors by leadership must be effective for any organization to be successful, thus the culture of an organization serves as a necessary ingredient in defining the type of organization. Leadership ust set goals or specific task that need to be implemented by their worker, ability to plan work activities with specific set time is very important, leadership must clarify each goal making it plane, understandable and provide specific objective for each goals. Leadership must monitor the progress of tasks giving to their followers and rate performance setting up a standard of achievement. And finally leadership must be supportive, developmental and possess the ability to recognize failure before it appears on surface and likewise successful task.

There are three major types of leadership styles which are characterized by leadership values, belief, state of mind, cultural organization etc, these are: Autocratic or Authoritarian: This type of leadership style is when leaders tell their followers what type of task needed to be accompanied or performed, how they want it done, without the imputes of their follower or their follower’s suggestion. This is a very unique way of government; it is used when leaders mainly want to gain motivation from followers and more commitment from them.

There seems to be misunderstanding of this leadership style with the present day workplaces of “bossing employee around” without any consideration of human feelings or respect for humanity. The weakness to this type of leadership style is that most people perceive this type of leadership has been bossy and too much authoritative. *This picture describes A*utocratic style of leadership I want this task done………… (Picture from www. nwlink. com/donclark/leader)

Democratic or Participative style of leadership involves one or more followers or team members in decision making processes or actualization of set goals. However, the final decision or authority is taking by the leader. It is easier to practice if leaders have trustworthy followers that are knowledgeable, skillful in a giving task and can be used if followers have certain information that complement that of leader’s ideal. There seems to always be a mutual benefit between the leader and followers.

The weakness to this type of leadership style is that there is always too much interference of ideals and can delay executions of plans. The ideal of working together to achieve a common goal or objective (Picture from www. nwlink. com/donclark/leader) Delegative or Free Reign type of leadership describe leaders allowing follower to make decision and are still responsible of decision that was taking. The leader set priorities as per what needs to be accompanied, time of execution and the final deadline for production.

This type of leadership style must be used wisely especially when dealing with trust and having confidence in followers. The only limitation is that as a leader, failures of followers automatically become leader’s responsibilities. *This picture describes Delegative or Free Reign *style of leadership This pictures describes leaders delegating task or responsibility to followers (Picture from www. nwlink. com/donclark/leader). Other types of leaders’ styles are:

Charismatic leadership style: These are leaders that followers perceived as been heroic, having strong personalities, they tend to have high self confidence, good examples is Barack Obama, the president of United Statesof America and former president, John F Kennedy of USA Situational leadership style: This type of leadership depends on various circumstances and an effective leader must be very careful in making decisions because it is imperative to make one in a bad situation.

Transactional type of leadership style: This type of leadership style is describedas rewarding as long that the followers are productivity but can be cut loose when they fail to produce. Servant leadership style: this leadership is responsible for their followers and also to a larger extend, less privilege in the society and this type of leadership describes leaders serving followers rather than follower serving leaders.

There are different forces that can influence the type of leadership styles, these are: Availability of time, the trust level, type of delegated tasks, information of the task, internal conflict, external influence (law of the land), the different stress level etc, depending on those forces, an effective leader must be able to combine or practice other type of leadership style to govern his or her followers properly. Good leadership style are characterized by their behavior, these are: They are good role model, very positive, optimistic, good listeners, communicator, result oriented, sets priorities, have good vision and mission tatement. The weaknesses of bad leaders are: they lack discipline, use poor judgment, are selfish, they are in sensitive to their followers needs, arrogant, holding grudges, unwillingness to adapt, overlying ambitious and treating followers with favoritism. Leadership theories explains the qualities that distinguish or differentiate leadership and their followers, it also focus on factors such as the present situation at giving point a time of leadership, likewise the skill level.

Based on these theories, leadership can be classified into the following: “Great Man” theories: This type of theories are based on the fact that great leaders are born and not made; it describes leaders as been heroic and is destined to reign as leader. The term “Great Man” was used because at certain era of time, the society believes that only men were primarily leaders. This makes leadership only a man’s affair. Trait theories: This type of theory is similar to Great man’s theory type of leadership because it is based on assumption of leaders which have inherited certain type of qualities that can be easily traceable.

These qualities are distinctive such as personalities, behavior that are associated with leaders. However this theory is not universally acceptable because everyone that has such traceable qualities or behavior must automically be a leader but that’s not the case. Contingency theories: These type of theories are directed toward a particular variable that are in connection to the environment and describes the type of leadership for that particular place. This leadership theory does not specifically support one particular type of leadership but its base on the existing condition or situation at the present time.

Leadership depends on numbers of variables such as time, present situation, environment, societal needs and the qualities of the followers must be put into consideration. This type of leadership theory describes my overall type of leadership style. Situational theories: These type of theories describes leadership choosing the best option of action based on the situational variables. This type of leadership is best applicable to decision making by the leaders. Behavioral theories: This type of leadership focus on plan of action by the leaders and this plan of action is not just mental or physical qualities.

This negate the theories of leadership that states” leaders are born and not made”, because people can learn to become leaders through interest, learning skill, ability to observe and impact knowledge. Participative theories: These type of leadership theories takes the input of team member or followers into consideration in making decisions; it encourages the contribution and participation of team group. This leadership theory still gives the leaders the ultimate or final decision making.

Management theories: This type of leadership is also known as transactional theories of leadership, it focuses on how leaders reward their followers, also in any organization how team member are been rewarded by their supervisor. This theory is generally performance oriented, followers get rewarded for good performance or get punish for failure. Relationship theories: These type of theories is also known as transformation theories, it focuses on the relationship between the leaders and the followers.

These type of theories ensures that followers fulfill their potential within the organization by motivation and encouragement from leaders. The leaders have a high moral and ethical standard that must be upheld at all times for the success of leadership. In an attempt to discover my leadership style, I took an online assessment which describes in total to some extend working with others and it explain in detail my leadership style. The first assessment is “What are my Leadership Styles”, based on this assessment I scored 9 (concern for people) and another 14 (concern for task).

Scoring 7 and above is excellent score for my concern for people while 10 and above is also an excellent score of concern for the task. The best leaders are the ones that can balance their people skills and still have the ability getting the job done. My high scores indicated that I can conveniently balance between my people skills and achieving my goals. I don’t do it only; people love to work for or with me. Autocratic leaders are just interested in getting the job done and not on the welfare of the people.

If a leader is too much people oriented, leadership is overly “laissez-Faire”, meaning people are so excited that they really don’t get the task done; their happiest is at the expense of production (What is my Leadership Style-Working with Others- Leadership and Team Skills Assessment: WEB LINK, February, 2010). The second assessment is “How Charismatic Am I”: These are personal qualities that give a leader influence or authority over their followers or individual with a group. The followers perceive him or her as been heroic or “messiah”.

They have an extraordinary leadership skills, high self confidence and strong conviction about any task they want to get done or executing their plans. This belief easily attracts their followers because they strongly believe in him or her. In my management of attention skills, I scored 20, indicating that I pay close attention to people when I am communicating with them. Management of meaning: scored 15, indicating how effective I am getting my meaning across to my people. Management of trust: scored 17, indicating that am willing to follow through promises and stand firm on any position taking.

Management of self: scored 19, meaning am very concern about the welfare of others and likewise their feelings. Management of risk: scored 18, indicating I am willing to take risk for those who believe in me and ready to move on in the face of adversities regardless of the circumstances. Management of Feelings: scored 19, indicating I have the ability to work with people’s feelings bring out the best in them (How Charismatic Am I-Working with Others- Leadership and Team Skills Assessment: WEB LINK, February, 2010).

The third assessment is “Do I Trust Others”, trust is an important element in dealing with people and also getting them to achieve or implement set goals and objective. I scored 1 which indicated high faith level from the analysis of the assessment while 5 is for low level of faith. High level of faith proofs my ability to work with people as a leader; I can conveniently work in HR department, teaching etc (Do I Trust Others-Working with Others- Leadership and Team Skills Assessment: WEB LINK, February, 2010). The fourth assessment is “Do Others See Me as Trust Worthy”, in this assessment I scored 57.

From the analysis, scores ranges between 9 and 63, scores above 45 indicate how high people or team member perceive me as been trust worthy while scores below 27 indicate how low team member perceive leaders as been trust worthy. Building trust among team member is very important in any successful organization; leaders have to be open-minded, give credit to others when they deserve it, show fairness at all times, follow through promises and maintain confidence at all times (Do Others See Me as Trust Worthy -Working with Others- Leadership and Team Skills Assessment: WEB LINK, February, 2010).

The fifth assessment is “How Good Am I at Disciplining Others”, I scored 20. This assessment gives an insight on how effective I might be at practicing discipline at workplaces. The scores ranged from 8 and 24, 22 and above indicate excellent skills at disciplining team member. My score indicated that there are needs for improvement, I should keep the process impersonal and disciplinary action should be progressive (How Good Am I at Disciplining Others -Working with Others- Leadership and Team Skills Assessment: WEB LINK, February, 2010).

The sixth assessment is “How Good Am I at Building and Leading a Team”, I scored 104 and the scores ranges from 18 and 108. This result indicated that I am in the top quartile (95 and above) while below 60 is bottom quartile. This analysis indicated that there are five development behaviors, namely: Diagnosing team development, managing the forming stage, managing the confirming stage, managing the storming stage and finally, managing the performing stage (How Good Am I at Building and Leading a Team -Working with Others- Leadership and Team Skills Assessment: WEB LINK, February, 2010).

Effective leadership is associated with high level of human involvement or followers in the society or organization. The organizational climate, timing including the needs of the people mediates the inheriting association between leaders and followers. In attempt to evaluate the performance of these two leaders mentioned below, l will like to point out this statement of fact” there is no one particular perfect leadership style use to govern followers but effective leaders study the event, environment before making decisions”.

The first leader I will choose is John F Kennedy, his charm, easy going personalities, followers’ involvement or team effort in making decision gave his leadership style a very unique one but he is ultimately responsible for the final decision and the outcome of those decisions. He seems to be in control of situation most time, understood his followers’ need and perceptions. He has a charismatic type of leadership, he was perceived as been heroic and his strong personalities penetrated not just his followers in the country but outside this country likewise.

He exhibited high confidence in making decisions there by gaining the trust of his followers with ease. His nature of cheerleaders played a vital role in his leadership style; he’s very dynamic, multi-talented and always optimistic which made it easier for him to see good and not evil or negativity in any situations. We know from experience with facts in life” NOTHING IS PERFECT”, his inability to see negative things or perceive bad in any situation has made his cheerleader style become a poor contingency planner of leading a team or project.

His leadership style is considered as not been totally analytical as the task unfolds. The leadership of John F Kennedy can be compared to that of Fidel Castro of Cuba. The second leadership style will be Fidel Castro; he has extreme self confidence or what I call as overconfidence, very demanding, reward failures with punishment, likewise disobedient and with act of punishment, it makes it easier for his followers to be loyal to him base on fear. He is highly independent, don’t really get followers involve in making decisions.

He shows great courage in the present of adversity even when been sanction by the outside communities. He’s willing to get harm regardless of the consequences in order to achieve is desire goals and objectives. He’s self absorbed. His style of leadership is regarded or viewed as a tyrant. The effectiveness of substitutes for leadership is described as making a clear distinction between two kinds of leadership behaviors and these are: substitutes and the neutralizers. The effectiveness of the substitute’s leadership makes leader behavior unnecessary and redundant (G. Yukl, 2006, P. 25), they include any organizational characteristics which ensure that subordinates will understand their role clearly in execution of deliberated task, knowing how they function and are highly motivated. Neutralizers eradicate leaders’ action by preventing them to act in a certain manner. Leadership substitute is focused on subordinate guidance in receiving task and also performance incentive from the leader (Howell and colleagues, 1990, P. 23). The effectiveness in substitute leadership is the experience, having the ability, high skill level of those leaders and are professional oriented.

In conclusion, effective leadership styles are dependent on various factors, the era or time of leaders is very important, the psychological need of the follower or nation becomes an effective tool in governing. Good leaders are very confidence in their action and words; this makes it easier for their followers to trust them. The strength of any good leadership is the ability to combine these leadership styles base on the need of the people and not just overly self ambition. References Yukl, G (2006).

Leadership in Organizations (6th Edition). Upper Saddle River, N. J: Pearson Education. Robbins, S. P. , & Judge, T. A. (2007). Organizational behavior (12th edition. ). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education. Newstron . J. W & Davis . K (1993). Organizational behavior-Human behavior at work, New York: Mc Graw Hill Rendra Van Wagner. Leadership theories, www. Psychology. about. com Pictures from www. nwlink. com/donclark/leader Six of Leadership and Team Skills Assessment: WEB LINK, February, 2010

Read more

The Different Methods and Styles of Leadership

In a seminal and much-cited article on the subject of lead-ership, Lewin, Lippitt, and White (1939) coined the term demo-cratic-style leadership to refer to a method of managing that involved give and take between leaders, or managers, and the people whose jobs they were guiding. Later identified with group leadership, democratic leadership was valorized vis-a-vis auto-cratic leadership on one side and laissez-faire leadership on the other.

One may readily infer the bias in favor of democratic leadership style from the mere naming of the other style terms. The autocratic style of leadership has been linked to the so-called scientific management methods envisioned by Frederick Taylor, who in the early part of the 20th century was influen-tial in devising a strategy of workplace behavior meant to elim-inate uncertainty and chaos in the workplace. The problem was that managers tended to leave employees out of the policy-imple-mentation equation.

Supposedly, scientific management would eliminate the adversary relationship between labor and manage-ment. Instead, “science, the impartial arbiter, would decide” (Kanigel, 1996, p. 45). Yet “science” inevitably meant top-down, hierarchical management practices: “Taylor’s experts and engineers did the thinking, while you were consigned to mindless doing” (Kanigel, 1996, p. 51). Laissez-faire leadership, as the term implies, fully em-powers the group members.

The actual leader recedes, but the group is responsible for its decisions. One trouble with that style is that the leader also withdraws as a resource, unless the group specifically asks for help, and intragroup rivalries and compe-tition can develop that can limit group effectiveness (Lewin, Lippitt, & White, 1939). There may be no shared vision about the group’s objective. One may also infer the potential for the tyranny of the majority, a term attributed to Tocque-ville in his 1839 book Democracy in America.

That idea also sur-faces in democratic-style management, but a leader changes the anarchic process by guiding the group away from internal power plays and toward unified group objectives. After World War II, influential management philosophy shifted toward ideas of democratic-style leadership with the work of W. Edwards Deming, whose famous Fourteen Points of man-agement included calls for management, not labor, to assume re-sponsibility for quality and for managers to act as leaders who clearly articulated work objectives and supported labor in im-plementing them (Walton, 1986).

Yet Deming’s management ideas were more wide-ranging than leadership per se, and the style associated with group dynamics is the focus of this research. Democratic-style leadership is consistent with management theory that views workers, or members of the leader’s group, as resources rather than as drains or something to be coped with or otherwise got over. Even where some hierarchical struc-tures are in place, communication processes are meant to travel up, down, and laterally within an organization, and management practice diffuses decision-making events “throughout the organization.

Even important decisions involve input from employees at all levels” (Hamiton & Parker, 2001, p. 58). The democratizing influence of such practice implies that communication will be interactive, not simply a matter of transmission of messages (commands) from managers to employees. The implication, too, is that such communication must take place in an environment of openness, honesty, and shared confi-dence (Hamilton & Parker, 2001, p. 58), which tends to yield cooperation and productivity.

Because enterprise activity is necessarily collaborative, communication effectiveness is of paramount concern. Openness for leaders involves disclosure (sharing) of information with subordinates plus the reception or feedback from them. The authors of the best-selling One Minute Manager valorize simple, direct, and honest explanation of what is expected by management of workers, together with regular follow-up and evaluation of performance, and a commitment on the part of management to both people and results (Blanchard & Johnson, 1981, p. 8).

That is, the more a manager facilitates subordinates’ work (p. 19), the more likely the workers as members of the leader’s group are to be productive and to produce high-quality work. Leadership that focuses on facilitating rather than defining the details or methods of the work of employees starts with making clear “what our responsibilities are and what we are being held accountable for” (p. 27). Realism about goals feeds realistic work habits and attention to achievement of those goals.

As leaders, managers must both permit and enable disclosure and/or feedback by group members in an environment of psycholo-gical safety (Hamilton & Parker, 2001), which is also a hallmark of democratic systems. Equally, managers must be alert to non-verbal as well as verbal cues that may supply information about a group’s performance and attitude. Hamilton and Parker give the (nonverbal) example of the prestige attached to corner offices as having the potential to affect the quality of workplace morale.

Time management, too, sends messages about the kind of equality associated with democracy: Being late for meetings may stigmatize employees (Hamilton & Parker, 2001, p. 160) but send the message that some people (for example, managers) who are late when others (for example, secretaries) are on time are en-titled to be so. To be effective, democratic styles of leader-ship lead by example, with leaders asking nothing of subordi-nates that they are not equipped to do themselves.

Read more

The Last Castle – Leadership Styles

ESSEY THE LAST CASTLE This movie presents the internal structure of an organization and also a parallel between two leading styles. The leadership style of two individuals will have consequences on the people they lead and on the final of the conflict. The whole action of the movie is compressed in the elements described by Gen.

Irwin at the beginning of the movie: he says that a castle must have four key elements, which include: the location, positioned on high ground, it must have protection from its enemies with a high wall, it must include the garrison (men willing to fight and kill for the castle), and lastly, a castle must have a flag, that the men have to protect by any means. These symbols truly describe the organization presented in the movie and forecast the taken over and the change of the leader.

The officially named manger of the prison is Winter who is presented as the ”bad guy’’ who commands its subordinates. But the true leader of the prisoners will be Gen. Irwin, presented as the “good guy” that will lead its subordinates by offering them self-respect and setting a positive example. Both of them have strong characteristics of leaders but one is dominated by negative features and the other one by ethical and moral principles. One has legal authority but one has the real power over the prisoners.

Gen Irwin is appointed as leader by the prisoners due to his reputation outside the prison, his values and charisma but also his position of prisoner. The others saw him as one of them that will truly represent their interests. The way each leader will impose his power is presented in an antithesis. Irwin tries to lead its men by creating value and positive attitude but the other one tried to lead by sever punishments. He controlled them through fear and unethical behavior taking advantage of his superior position. People trust one and fear the other one.

Winter only wanted benefits for him, to be recognized as a good leader between its peers and had no regard for the prisoners. He was proud of his performance as a prison director where no one intended to escape and no murders took place. He totally ignored the treatment he himself applied to the prisoners including killing them. In contradiction with Winter, Irwin cared about his men rather than caring about himself and how could he benefit from his position. He entrusts his men and reactivates their self respect and their attitudes of soldiers.

If at the start of the movie the prisoners were not collaborating with each other and were even fighting for insignificant reasons, after Gen. Irwin takes command, the prisoners become a team and start to trust and to help each other. (as for example when one prisoner suggests that the wall isn’t build correctly he is aggressed, but Irwin delegated a small degree of power to him and makes the other ones listen to that young prisoner who will supervise the wall construction). Regarding the characteristics that made Gen.

Irwin a good leader I could mention morality and ethical principles, the respect for the members of his team, ability to plan ahead using the resources available, ability to build confidence in people and motivate them to achieve a common goal, personal commitment to that goal (that lead to his death) and also viewing only the best in the members of his team, in contradiction with Winter who only searched for the worst in the people and use those negative traits to manipulate the prisoners and achieve his own goals. Winter is clearly intimidated by Gen.

Irwin, recognizing in this way his character and power. He will treat differently the general at first because he was a national hero and later because he is afraid of the power the general has over the inmate and that minimizes clearly his authority in that organization. Finally when he sees he cannot win the General by his side he will loose his control and try by any means to state his position. In a small degree I would agree with the type of leadership Winter practices, taking into account the environment. That was still a prison with convicted solders and therefore extreme rules have to be adopted.

Punishments have to be used to maintain the order between prisoners but this does not mean that the commander of the prison has to take advantage of his position and manipulate and mock the prisoners. (The best example would be with the basket ball. That action had no educational purpose, it was only a statement of power). Although it can also be mentioned that Gen. Irwin didn’t knew how to comply with the commands given by the major authority (Winter), actually think Irwin could not ignore the bad treatments applied to the inmates, the constant rule breaking and also the respect and trust that the other prisoners had in him.

Seeing the punishment that Aguilar received for saluting him was probably the decision point where the general agreed to take over the command of his team. The wall that was demolished by the prisoners is the symbolic act of recognizing their new leader and of accepting to fallow his order. In the end of the movie, Winter losses command on the prisoners, on the guards and finally on himself. Gen Irene will take his place, becoming the true leader for the prisoners but also for the guards that will prove their respect by refusing to shut him down.

This story is perfectly valid for the real world business environment . In a company, the manager is not that preoccupied about the subordinates, but prizes with his performances it obtains. Also, the managers create lots of strict rules to maintain disciplines and a sustained working schedule. At first, people might obey the rules because of fearing to break the rule and losing their jobs. But they will still appoint another leader that although does not have official authority has the respect of all the employees and might help them change the situation and gain their rights within the company.

This movie points out that leadership is a powerful tool with which you can bring together people and accomplish a common goal but if it is not used correctly it can bring you or your organization to self-destruction. The message displayed by the movie about the two different points of view regarding leadership is definitely found in the business world on a large scale and with other types of implications (that that violent but surly very important for the well-being of the company and of the employees ).

Read more

LDR 300 Week Two My Leadership Style

University of Phoenix

My Leadership Style is Relational Leadership. I’ve adapted this leadership style because it deals with the healthcare industry very strongly and these skills fit me. This leadership skill includes the ability to create interconnections between caregivers and among multiple armed services. In the past when I served in the military my leadership style use to me Authoritative, after years of being this type of leader I realized that it actually made me a mean person over the years and I decided to become a Relational Leader because I do care about the well-being of my workers and the care of the patients. I work at Naval Medical Center, San Diego as a Management Assistant and my department is truly focused on ensuring that all departments receive the correct funding in order to make sure our patients get the best medical care available.

I’m a firm believer in being able to work as a team and build great relationships with staff. When you keep your staff abreast at all times it makes them feel like part of a team and it also motivates them to want to go over and beyond the scope of their job. Relational Leadership is effective because it motivates and builds team work it works very effective for me because it involves people and there diverse points of view. It also keeps me fair and ethical by trying to ensure that all my team members are making a difference in the work place as well as respecting everyone’s opinions. By utilizing Relational Leadership I’m empowering others to get involved and stay involved, it also promotes self-leadership as well as learning at an individual and team level. I’m a great listener, focused on the well-being of others and always willing to keep an open door policy in order to be able to discuss any issues that may be brewing and need immediate action to resolve. Sometimes being a Relational Leader isn’t always good because you may not be taken serious at times because you’re always trying to be a people person. Also read about Aung San Suu Kyi leadership style

If you don’t have a range of interpersonal skills and approaches as well as knowing when to use what with who, the outcome may not be too good. Although there are many leadership styles, many people have researched and discovered that managers often use these skills and could be used at very different times that depend on the issue that they are handling. I look up to the many successful Leaders that I have had the opportunity of working with and I’ve incorporated a piece of leadership from all my mentors, mangers and leaders in order to create my own style of leadership that I feel is working for me today.

Read more
OUR GIFT TO YOU
15% OFF your first order
Use a coupon FIRST15 and enjoy expert help with any task at the most affordable price.
Claim my 15% OFF Order in Chat
Close

Sometimes it is hard to do all the work on your own

Let us help you get a good grade on your paper. Get professional help and free up your time for more important courses. Let us handle your;

  • Dissertations and Thesis
  • Essays
  • All Assignments

  • Research papers
  • Terms Papers
  • Online Classes
Live ChatWhatsApp