Effective Leadership within an Organisational Context - Essay Example

?Effective leadership within an organisational context Leadership is one of the crucial requirements to achieve success in any activity that involvesinterests of many individuals (Chemers, 1997). Within organisations this concept plays a crucial role in the development of the processes and behaviors of individuals (involved within that organisation) that eventually helps them to achieve success (Marturano and Goslking, 2008). According to many theorists and researchers like Martin Chemers (1993) and Fred Fiedler (1990), leadership may be defined as “the process of social influence in which one person can enlist the aid and support of others in the accomplishment of a common task” (Chemers, 1997). This can be defined as the process where people are concerned about group interests and their acts are guided in that direction only. In this regards leadership is viewed as an instrument of achieving group interests and coordinated goals (Chemers, 1997). The concept of leadership is involved in all formal and informal social activities, and has become a fundamental part of social and working life (Chemers, 1993). Moreover, this concept of leadership is closely associated with organisational functions and organisational properties, where the basic nature of these organisations or groups might have been inefficient in the beginning (Chemers, 1993). In order to be efficient, organisations require the efforts of each of its members to be managed and coordinated (Chemers, 1993). Those members need to spend time and employ resources to build up coordinations to accomplishment their desired goals. More narrow the group or organisation, the greater is the requirement for those resources (Chemers, 1993). As stated by Chemers (1997) in today’s world it is very difficult for only one person to do all tasks and group works and organisations are very much needed to accomplish goals of the entire group. In this regard the concept of leadership is crucial for achieving success. According to Chemers (1997) organisational coordinations leaders are most essential for achieving goals and success. The aim of this paper is to examine the major functions of leadership and tries to evaluate the need for effective leadership in fulfilling those functions. To achieve success where group interests are present, effective leadership is required. Explaining leadership: The word ‘leadership’ in literature is used according to individual perspectives of researchers and aspects that are most relevant to them in their context of research (Northouse, 2010). There are almost similar amounts of definitions and concepts to the number of researchers. It can be defined in various aspects and dimensions. For example, Western (2008) states that leadership can be defined in terms of behaviors, characteristics, patterns of interactions, influence, administrative positional occupation and role relationships. According to House (2004) leadership represents the assumption that it entails a process where purposeful influence is applied over other people of a group or organisation to direct, structure and to facilitate activities and relationships in that group or organisation. Many definitions of leadership have been made with regard to concepts related to leadership. These definitions differ in many regards, including the person who exerts the influence, the presumed purpose of that influence, methods in which influence is applied, and the possible and observed outcomes of that influence (Yukl, 2011). According to Grint (2010) leadership can be defined in four aspects: position-based leadership, person-based leadership, results-based leadership and process-based leadership. All these concepts are related to an organisation. Firstly, in case of position-based leadership, the concept deals with the position in the formal or informal organisation. In this regard, leadership is explained as the activity taken by a person who is at the vertical position or the person is “at the top of the tree” having power of all the resources to lead (Grint, 2010). For example, the chief executive officers (CEOs) of multinational companies, military generals, head teachers of educational institutes (Johnson and Parry, 2008). The main principle of this leadership is that these leaders, by being situated at the top or the organisation, can control and manage all the available resources and man-power for achieving desired goals of that organisation. Secondly, person-based leadership deals with the person who has the charismatic character or personality to become the leader of the group or the organisation (Michelson, 2004). Due to his/her charismatic personality followers are attached with that person to achieve some predefined and social goal. For example, Mahatma Gandhi became the leader who had that charismatic character or personality to lead for achieving the goal of Indian freedom. The great leaders in history, from Mao Zedong, Franklin D. Roosevelt, John F. Kennedy, and Adolf Hitler, are examples of people having great personality and power to lead a nation or an organisation. Thirdly there is results-based leadership. This concept is considered to be of the greatest importance (Grint, 2010) because without proper results the purpose of leadership does not show significant evaluations. The basic logic behind this approach is that it is difficult to conclude whether a leader has been successful in fulfilling their goals or not if the results are not realised. The primary concern for leadership is to focus on the final results realised form the efforts of the leaders. For instance, if a company achieves the desired rate of increase in profits, then the leader of that company (or the CEO) has to be rewarded for that. However, in this regard the issue that comes under consideration is how can the differences between the performances of the overall organisation and that of the leader be measured. One significant example of this is the achieved successes of Benjamin Franklin. At the beginning of Franklin’s leadership, as one of the founding fathers of the United States of American, he could not achieve all the desired successes but at the end of his time he became one of the successful leaders in the world history. Finally, in a process-based leadership a leader is defined in terms of the processes that he/she has applied to achieve that success (Grint, 2010). These processes are unique in nature and are not applicable without the proper concern to the leader whom has applied them. A prominent example of a process-based leader is Steve Jobs, an inventor and co-founder of Apple. Jobs applied many unique processes in order to make a new era in the fields of computer and information technology (Grint, 2010). There have been many debates among theorists (reference a few) whether the definition of leadership should take into account not only the person whom has applied the influences of leadership, but also the types of influences which have been exercised by the leader. According to some theorists, like Martin Chemers (1993) and Fred Fiedler (1990), the definition of leadership is limited to those activities from leaders which have gained enthusiastic commitments from the followers. Yukl (2011) states this definition excludes those activities of leaders that have reluctant obedience from the followers. Many theories on effective leadership distinguish between direct leadership and indirect leadership. Direct leadership deals with the direct influences of the leader and his activities on all the followers, who have the power to interact directly with the leader. In comparison, indirect leadership deals with the fact that the leader influences all his lower level followers of the organisation, but these followers do not have the power to interact directly with the leader. Examples of direct leadership include interacting activities of the CEO of an organisation by holding meetings with all levels of employees, communicating with employees through e-mails, sending those employees memos or reports, participating in group activities with the employees, for example, training sessions, picnics, and work related parties. On the other hand, indirect leadership includes a form of leadership called “cascading”, where the direct influences of the CEO on immediate lower level employees are passed on through the authority hierarchy of that organisation (Yukl, 2011). This is an indirect form of influencing the subordinates of the CEO of the organisation. Another important form of indirect leadership represents influences of the leader over formal programs, management and structural systems. For example, many CEOs of large organisations apply this form of influencing their employees. A third form of indirect leadership involves influences of the leader on the culture of the organisation (Yukl, 2011). Leadership theories and evidences: There are many theories related to the concept of effective leadership, and interest into leadership has increased during the twentieth century (How Leadership Influences Organizational Effectiveness, 2003). Early theories focused mainly on the differing factors between the leader and the followers. However, subsequently few theories have emerged which have included aspects like situations under consideration and the leader’s skill to tackle those situations (How Leadership Influences Organizational Effectiveness, 2003). According to Northouse (2010), there are eight main theories regarding the concept of effective leadership: the “Great Man” theory, the Trait Leadership theory, the Contingency theory, the Situational theory, the Behavioural theory, the Participative Leadership theory, the Management theory and the Relationship theory. The “Great Man” theory of leadership believes that the ‘great leaders are born, not made’. According to this theory, some people are considered to be destined to emerge as great leaders. Northouse (2009) states this theory is a male dominated concept of leadership, where it is related mainly to military leadership. The trait leadership theory deals with the form of leadership whereby leaders have great traits enable them to be differentiated from others. This concept is similar to the “Great Man” theory and believes that few leaders inherit those special characteristics required to become the leader. This theory identifies certain behavioral characteristics and features which make those leaders to become a part of the history as greatest and successful leaders. Northouse (2009) defines these characters in terms of the charismatic personalities of the leaders, in terms of controlling the organisation, and managing the activities of that organisation. These characteristics include the ability to take proper responsibilities and to achieve the desired success by completing the task, the ability to have desires for the goal, the ability to take risks and to solve problems, the ability to initiate steps in social situations, having enough self-confidence and personal identity, the great ability to accept consequences of actions and discussions, the ability to absorb interpersonal stress and debates, the great ability to affect and influence other people’s behaviours, and the ability to make necessary changes in the social structure to achieve that reassigned goal (Northouse, 2009). The key strength of this approach is that those characteristics of the great leaders of world history are defined. Hence, this theory is based entirely on practical experiences of the researchers and these practical experiences have emerged as success stories to the rest of the world (Northouse, 2009). However the main weakness of using this theory is, it is difficult to determine whether a leader possess those characteristics or not. Northouse (2009) states that an additional difficulty in using this theory is, researchers of trait theory did not incorporate situational analyses. That is to say, a leader in a specified situation might not be the leader in another situation. Examples of these leaders include Catherine the Great, Mahatma Gandhi, Indira Gandhi, Abraham Lincoln and Napoleon Bonaparte. A solution to the weaknesses discussed associated with trait theory of leadership was provided by the Contingency theory. This theory explains that the style and form of leadership depends on the situation on which that style or form is applied (How Leadership Influences Organizational Effectiveness, 2003). However, no particular form of leadership is applicable in all situations. According to this theory success depends on various factors including the style of leadership, tendencies of the followers, aspects of the concerned situation etc. Behavioral theory is the opposite of the “Great Man” theory and the trait theory. This theory believes that the great leaders are made, not born. How Leadership Influences Organizational Effectiveness (2003) suggests that the situation under consideration teaches the person to become the leader and to lead the organisation or the group to achieve the desired success. A prominent example behavioural theory was the leadership of Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose, who sacrificed his career for the sake of India’s freedom and led the Azad Hind Fauj to achieve the success. The situational theory is almost similar to the contingency theory. It surmises that the choice of leadership style depends on the particular situation (How Leadership Influences Organizational Effectiveness, 2003). Leaders try to pick the finest path of actions in some categories of decision-making. These actions are the best possible set of actions for that particular situation. For example, Mahatma Gandhi chose a specific leadership style according to the situation of the country and its future. Participative leadership theory suggests that an ideal leader should consider inputs of all the group members into account while making a decision. According to Zaccaro and Klimoski (2001), these leaders need to inspire all the group members to contribute in the administrative process by letting them feel more pertinent and dedicated. These leaders are also required to encourage all the group members to put significant efforts and contributions in the decision-making process. But the main drawback of this approach is that the leaders still has the right of the use of inputs, given by the group members. This theory has very little uses in sports like Football, Cricket etc. For instance, Sir Alex Ferguson, the manager of English football team Manchester United, uses participative theory to great extent for achieving team’s desired success of winning matches and trophies (How Leadership Influences Organizational Effectiveness, 2003). Management theories or the transactional theories focus mainly on the ability of the leader to supervise and organise the organisation and its members, and group performance (How Leadership Influences Organizational Effectiveness, 2003). This theory believes on the system of rewards and punishments and is widely used in modern businesses. Rewards are given to the employees when they are successful in achieving their target or goal and they are punished when they fail to get the success. Relationship or transformational theory, emphasizes on the networks between the leader and his team. These leaders are called the transformational leaders and they stimulate and instigate their groups to reach goals. This is carried out by helping their group members to realise the importance of the task. These leaders are focused on achieving group members’ optimum performance and to realise their individual potential. According to Chemers (1997), these leaders possess high ethical and moral standards. Evolutions in the thinking process of leadership style: There has been an evolution in the thinking processes of leadership styles (Marti1 et al., 2009), which began when different leaders started to apply different styles of leadership in practice, and achieved their desired successes (Knippenberg and Hogg, 2003). These different styles of leadership began the onset of developing most new theories on leadership. Amongst those new theories the Management theory and the Relationship theory are most important (Chemers, 2000). According to Storey (2004) the Management theory and the Relationship theory both have been applied by almost all the businesses across the world. Therefore it could be determined that these theories rely are more suited for business purposes. Several business leaders and marketing leaders have applied these two theories in achieving their goals. For example, Mukesh Ambani, owner of Reliance industries, has applied Management and Relationship theories in order to achieve the success of the global business of the company (Ogbonna and Harris, 2010). The concept of leadership has been changed from showing individual charismas to managing an organisation or a group with many people having different cultural backgrounds or upbringings, but trying to achieve the same ultimate goal (Storey, 2004). Mupa et al. (20110 states, organisations require magnetic leadership that is capable of attracting followers into that organisation. Without proper and defined leadership, an organisation will suffer from several problems which can only be solved with the aid of an effective leadership. This is because an effective leadership can remove all the roadblocks and can clear all the obstacles which deter followers to achieve their desired goal (Mupa et al., 2011). Effective leadership in organisations: The need for effective leadership is growing in the rapid speed in modern world (Josiah, 2007). According to Josiah (2007), there are various reasons behind why effective leadership is required to run an organisation to achieve group interests, which are discussed now. Fleenor and Bryant (2002) state that organisations require magnetic leadership that is capable of attracting followers into that organisation. Without proper and defined leadership, an organisation suffers from several problems which can only be solved with the help of an effective leadership (John, 2002). These problems may include ineffective judgment and chaos within organisation, and also lead to inefficient decision-makings by the members of the organisation. This is because an effective leadership can remove all the roadblocks and can clear all the obstacles which deter followers to achieve their desired goal (Mupa et al., 2011). Fairholm (2009) considers that there are various visionary actions of a person which make him a leader. Among those actions, the most important ones are an ability to create a vision, a mission, and a strategy, an ability to communicate with the followers about those visions or missions or strategies, a power and willingness to motivate followers, and, most importantly, helping the organisation or group to grow or evolve in critical or challenging changing environments (Fairholm, 2009). In this regard, an important distinction has to be made between a leader and an administrator or a manager. Administrators and managers are not entitled to do all those tasks stated above, whereas a leader can (Organizational Effectiveness Discovering How to Make It Happen, 2006). The effectiveness of a leader does not depend on whether he is an administrator or not. In comparison, a manager can play both the roles of a leader and an administrator. These features and properties make a person a successful leader in all respects of that organisation (Mills, 2005). Examples and evidences of effective leadership: In the 1980s Harley-Davidson was almost forced out of business by immense competition from its rivals. During this troubled time, Rich Teerlink was appointed as leader of the business. He led the company and made significant changes, including changes to the entire structure of the employees and managers. These and other changes enabled Teerlink to achieve desired successes for the organisation (Mills, 2005). He used a bottom-up approach, instead of a top-down approach, in order to encourage his managers and employees to make significant changes in favour of the company. These changes included hard-working by employees and managers to compete with other firms and businesses. He used the Participative theory of leadership in order to achieve the desired success of achieving financial stability (Mills, 2005). A second important example includes the leadership of Steve Jobs, who not only achieved the desired success of the organisation, but also has defined a new form of management leadership to the world. He managed his employees and managers in such a way that they became more concerned about achieving excellence in their respective field. Jobs’ method of leadership was not similar to textbooks and conventional theories. He believed in results (Mills, 2005). Among the many examples of effective leadership in government, one of the most important cases was related to Charles O. Rossotti. Rossotti became the commissioner of the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) in 1997. During this time IRS was suffering from several problems including scandals and technological problems. Rossotti made several changes in the management, including changes in business strategies, changes in marketing strategies and changes in negotiating behaviours with the taxpayers and employees (soften behaviours). With his powerful leadership ability he empowered the organisation to earn revenue of $2 trillion (Mills, 2005). Conclusion: History has shown us that the concept of effective leadership is highly needed for any organisation to achieve its desired success (Organizational Effectiveness Discovering How to Make It Happen, 2006). A leader can make the necessary changes and evaluations to make the organisation to work more perfectly and more accurately. In this regard the evidences and instances are more appropriate to comment on the fact that an effective and efficient leadership is almost always capable of making all those corrections within the organisation to make it perfect (House et al., 2002). Also an effective leadership can sustain the growth path of the organisation. Within an organisation a leader can play several other roles as local line leader, who maintains accounts for results, community builder, who is responsible for interacting with local leaders and carries new ideas and practices, and executive leader, who executes all those new ideas and practices (Prosser, 2010). Most of the successful leaders have played all these roles and hence achieved successes for their organisations (Van Wart, 2007). Hence, it can easily be said that effective leadership is the foremost condition for achieving success of any organisation (private or government). References: 1. Chemers, M. M. (1993), Leadership theory and research: perspectives and directions, USA: Academic Press 2. Chemers, M. M. (2000), Leadership, Change, and Organizational Effectiveness, available at: http://www.almaden.ibm.com/coevolution/pdf/chemers_paper.pdf (accessed on December 24, 2011) 3. Chemers, M. M. (1997), An integrative theory of leadership, London: Routledge 4. Fleenor, J. W. and Bryant, C. (2002), Leadership Effectiveness and Organizational Culture: An Exploratory Study, Presented at the meeting of the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Toronto, Canada, available at: http://www.denisonconsulting.com/newsletter/1.0/images/ccl2002.pdf (accessed on December 24, 2011) 5. Fairholm, M. R. (2009), Leadership and Organizational Strategy, The Innovation Journal: The Public Sector Innovation Journal, Vol. 14, No. 1, pp.1-16 6. Grint, K. (2010), Leadership: a very short introduction, Oxford: Oxford University Press 7. House, R. J. (2004), Culture, leadership, and organizations: the GLOBE study of 62 societies, USA: Sage Publication 8. House, R. J., Hanges, P. J., Ruiz-Quintanilla, S. A., Dorfman, P. W., Javidan, M., Dickson, M. and Vipin Gupta, (2002), CULTURAL INFLUENCES ON LEADERSHIP AND ORGANIZATIONS: PROJECT GLOBE, available at: http://www.thunderbird.edu/wwwfiles/sites/globe/pdf/process.pdf (accessed on December 24, 2011) 9. How Leadership Influences Organizational Effectiveness, (2003), VRS Business Psychologists: Newsline, available at: http://www.vrhconsulting.com/2003VRHSpringNEWSLINE.pdf (accessed on December 24, 2011) 10. Johnson, B. and Parry, K. (2008), A very short, fairly interesting and reasonably cheap book about studying leadership, Thousand Oaks, California: Sage Publications 11. John, D. (2002), Organisational Learning and Effectiveness, London: Routledge 12. Josiah, D. S. (2007), The interconnectedness between efficient and effective models of leadership, UK: ProQuest 13. Knippenberg, D. V. and Hogg, M. A. (2003), Leadership and power: identity processes in groups and organizations, USA: Sage Publication 14. Marturano, A. and Goslking, J. (eds.) (2008), Leadership: the key concepts, London: Routledge 15. Marti1, M., Gil, F. and Angel Barrasa, (2009), Organizational Leadership: Motives and Behaviors of Leaders in Current Organizations, The Spanish Journal of Psychology, Vol. 12, No. 1, pp.267-274 16. Mills, D. Q. (2005), The Importance of Leadership, Leadership: How to Lead, How to Live, available at: http://www.mindedgepress.com/PDFs/htlhtl.pdf (accessed on December 24, 2011) 17. Mupa, P., Chiome, C. and Raphinos A. Chabaya, (2011), Leadership in Organisations, USA: LAP Lambert Academic Publishing 18. Michelson, B. J. (2004), Leadership and Power Base Development: Using Power Effectively to Manage Diversity and Job-Related Interdependence in Complex Organizations, available at: http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/au-24/michelson.pdf (accessed on December 24, 2011) 19. Northouse, P. (2010), Leadership: theory and practice, (5th Ed), Thousand Oaks, California: Sage Publications 20. Northouse, P. (2010), Leadership: theory and practice, (5th ed), Thousand Oaks, California: Sage Publications 21. Northhouse, P. (2009), Introduction to leadership: concepts and practice, Los Angeles; London: Sage Publications 22. Ogbonna, E. and Harris, L. C. (2000), Leadership style, organizational culture and performance: empirical evidence from UK companies, International Journal of Human Resource Management, Vol. 11, No. 4, pp. 766-788 23. Organizational Effectiveness Discovering How to Make It Happen, (2006), available at: http://www.right.com/thought-leadership/research/organizational-effectiveness-discovering-how-to-make-it-happen.pdf (accessed on December 24, 2011) 24. Prosser, S. (2010), Effective people: leadership and organisation development in healthcare, UK: Radcliff 25. Storey, J. (2011), Leadership in organizations, [ELECTRONIC BOOK]: current issues and key trends, (2nd ed.), Routledge, 2011 26. Schruijer, S. and Vansina, L. (1999), Leadership and Organizational Change: A Special Issue of the European Journal of Work and Organisational Psychology, UK: Taylor & Francis 27. Van Wart, M. (2007), Leadership in public organizations: an introduction, New York: M.E. Sharpe 28. Western, S. (2008), Leadership: a critical text. London: SAGE 29. Yukl, G.A (2010), Leadership in organizations, (7th ed), Upper saddle River, New Jersey: Prentice Hall 30. Zaccaro, S. J. and Klimoski, R. J. (2001), The nature of organizational leadership: understanding the performance, California: Wiley Read More