Leadership when it Matters Most - Term Paper Example

? Leadership when it Matters Most number In the contemporary world, leaders should be able to entice their subordinates’ commitment in order to meet missions in a dynamic and fast changing environment. Modern leaders should be competent to adapt different styles to utilize the potential of employees to the maximum. Leadership today is not about using a preferred style; instead, brilliant leaders are those who can adopt different approaches to meet varying situations. This paper will shed light on leadership styles and concepts based on an actual example of a production manager. The example will be used to show how transformational leadership is used in the modern world to bring out the maximum potential of employees by using influence tactics, leader-member exchange, decision-making etc. On the other hand, transformational leadership will be contrasted to transactional leadership to identify its advantages and disadvantages. Lastly, its relevance and usefulness in the globalized world will be discussed. After a thorough examination of literature from a vast variety of sources combined with detailed study of real life leadership example, the advantages of transformational leadership are well established. Undoubtedly, the productivity of workers rises due to encouraging two-way communication, shared decision-making, reduced distance between various hierarchal levels and the like. This in turn allows an organization to adapt to the swift changing globalized market and successfully fulfill its mission and vision in the longer run. Besides escalating productivity, transformational leadership also brings out the creativity and innovative element in employees. In the ultimate analysis, transformational leadership style can greatly increase the effectiveness of a leader. However, overall, the most effective leader is who can develop external awareness of needed actions and the internal flexibility to adapt quickly any leadership style as appropriate. Introduction The purpose of this paper is to critically analyze and evaluate a real life leader in the light of various leadership theories and models. Therefore, this paper will present a real life example of production manager acting as a transformational leader. The essay will go on to give a brief account of the influence tactics, decision-making models, contingency factors, ethical considerations as demonstrated by this particular leader. In addition, the strengths and weaknesses of transformational leadership shall be critically evaluated in order show its usefulness and relevance in the modern globalized market. Lastly, I will present an objective evaluation of the kind of transformational leadership characteristics exhibited by this leader, which I possess or lack. Context Undeniably, transformational society has been widely adopted since James MacGregor Burns first presented the concept back in 1978. The widespread adoption of this particular leadership style can be understood by taking into account its myriad advantages, for instance, greater motivation, morale, productivity, and the like. In the contemporary world, human resources have been established as the most imperative factor of production so it is crucial to fulfill their needs as presented in Maslow’s hierarchy to tap their maximum potential. This particular example of a transformational leader operating in the production area will present clearly the advantages of connecting an employee’s sense of identity and achievement with his work and the overall organization. Unlike autocratic transactional leaders, it is integral for a leader to act as a role model for his subordinates in order to inspire and set standards of high performance for them. The fast-changing and extremely competitive globalized market demands a successful organization to align its employees with tasks that they are can perform the best. Discussion and Analysis This leader serves as a prime example of transformational leadership as he displays all the four core elements of this leadership style. To start with, he pays individualized consideration to the needs of his subordinates. He empathizes and supports his subordinates while maintaining a certain degree of authority. Consequently, the workers are inspired and motivated towards self-development. Most importantly, he has idealized influence over his subordinates. Through his own ethical and trustworthy attitude, he has earned the respect and trust of his employees (Odom & Green, 2003). In addition, he triggers intellectual stimulation by holding meetings on a regular basis to present challenges before his subordinates regarding any production problems. As production staff is composed of well-experienced, technical specialists so he solicits the most feasible ideas; hence, making the most of the expertise of employees. These brainstorming sessions encourage his subordinates to contemplate over problems and come up with even better ways to resolve production barriers, reducing costs etc. Moreover, in these regular meetings, he keeps emphasizing how their department contributes and fits in the overall organizational mission. The communication of future goals together with an emphasis on high standards gives clear direction and purpose to his subordinates. His strong, optimistic personality and good communication skills make the organizational goals precise, understandable, and motivating for employees (Kotlyar & Karakowsky, 2007). In today’s globalized and swiftly changing market places, production departments play a crucial rule in the success of manufacturing industries. Innovation has been the leading principle in this sector; thus, it is critically important to make the most of the potential and expertise of production staff. Their knowledge is much higher due to hands on experience with work so they can contribute more feasible and innovative solutions in challenging situations. Therefore, it is integral for a production leader to adopt a co-operative attitude, encouraging innovative ideas and creativity to give a manufacturing organization a competitive edge. Naturally, the production manager uses legitimate/positional power due to his position in the organizational hierarchy. As he has worked his way to this management position through hard work and skillfulness, so his subordinates as well as colleagues respect his positional power. This also reveals that he possesses expert power that is the power of his knowledge and expertise in the production area, which earned him promotions. Thereby, his perspective, ideas are highly influential on his other workers due to his knowledge, specialist skills, and experience. As mentioned earlier, this production manager enjoys good interpersonal relations with his subordinates with a certain degree of authority and respect, so he enjoys referent power too. His personal example based on hard work and knowledge makes him a charismatic and inspirational leader. In addition, his emphasis on performance, work ethics, and high standards has earned him the respect of other departmental managers and especially the regional director. This also positively contributes to his referent power. Lastly, to some degree he uses reward power to motivate his subordinates. His legitimate power gives him the reward power to appraise and promote his employees within the production department. These act as excellent motivators for his subordinates who know that not only are their contributions adopted but also rewarded in terms of salary increments and promotions. In this scenario, the complexity of the multinational organization is a negative contingent factor for the leadership style. However, the production manager’s power and influence over the production department’s goals and ability to meet the expectations of his subordinates are positive contingent factors for his leadership. Likewise, the tasks are also unambiguous, essentially routine, and certain, which again is serves as a favorable contingent factor for him. This production manager used all four primary influence tactics. For instance, the production manager uses inspirational appeal by settings a model example for his subordinates to follow. He also aligns their departmental tasks with the organizational mission in the periodical meetings, which is a primary motivator. In addition, clear facts related to production problems are laid in brainstorming sessions in order to use logical persuasion a rational to come up with and implement the most practically feasible solution. These periodical meetings and brain storming sessions are undoubtedly a classic illustration of consultation, which is one of the key influence tactics. Workers feel more involved and intrinsically motivated to accomplish work targets they themselves established. So far, the manager has not used collaboration, which would involve establishing matrix teams compromising of specialists from all departments to develop them best products from all aspects (Charbonneau, 2004). A transformation leader does more than fulfilling the needs of his subordinates in exchange for their support. This is evident in the case of the production manager who has established an example of ethical conduct to inspire his subordinates. Moreover, he keeps giving his employees a moral direction and emphasizing the moral aspects of work. The regular professional consultations in the form of brainstorming sessions encourage two-way communication and participative/collaborative decision-making. Unlike paternalistic managers, the proposals of subordinates are not only heard but evaluated for practicability and subsequently implemented. The production manager gives direction and workers then freely express their ideas. Two heads are better than one, so undoubtedly collaborative decision-making based on expert and specialist opinions with hands on experience prove more practically successful (Shin & Zhou, 2003). A chief neutralizer that weakened the production manager’s influence was the indifference of subordinates to rewards. As the organization is a multi-national company and already pays its workforce well, so workers were not much moved by exerting reward power. Likewise, a major substitute for leadership was the technical competence and professional orientation of the employees. However, innovative and challenging tasks, lack of cohesive work groups, lack of self-managed production teams, and unambiguous organizational formulation were substitutes that supported transformational leadership style of the production manager (Howell & Dorfman, 1981). Similarly, the legitimate power of the production manager to decide about promotions and monetary rewards of his subordinates acted as a positive neutralizer for his leadership. Conclusions In the ultimate analysis, it can be concluded that the production manager exercises transformational leadership as he engages his subordinates with a focus on their intrinsic needs, raises awareness about how specific organizational outcomes are to be achieved. He has a proactive approach and encourages intellectual stimulation by promoting creative and innovative thinking to solve challenges. In this example, the production manager’s leadership style has directly influenced the productivity and efficiency of his subordinates. This has been seen in not only greater production but fewer accidents, more innovative solutions and products, cost reduction, lesser labor turnover, greater commitment, and more pride in organizational mission. Reflections Fiedler’s Contingency Model presented three situational elements that would determine whether task-oriented or relationship-oriented leadership is more suited to the situation. The first component revolved around the relations between the leader and his members/subordinates. This signified the level of trust, respect, and confidence in the abilities of leaders as well as employees. The second element titled as task structure referred to the degree of clarity in group tasks and structures. Lastly, the third component known as Leader Position Power denoted the legitimate and inherent power of the leader due to his position in the organizations; hierarchy (Sahertian & Soetjipto, 2011). When the leader-member relations are healthy, the task structure is clear, and the leader position is high in organizational hierarch, then the situation is termed as favorable. According to Fiedler, low LPC leaders work well in both, extremely favorable as well as unfavorable circumstances. In contrast, high LPC leaders can only perform well in intermediate favorable situations. Another leadership model by Vroom and Yetton again presented a situational leadership theory. This model can determine the extent to which subordinates will follow the decision of a particular leader based on seven straightforward questions concerning commitment, decision quality and acceptance, and problem information. Like Fiedler, the basic philosophy of this model is that the best leadership style is entirely dependent on the situation and advocates group decision-making. Nonetheless, this model identifies five different decision-making styles, contingent upon situational factors and level of subordinate involvement. In the example of the production manager, the leader discussed problems in regular brainstorming sessions with his subordinates to come up with the most practical and effective solution. He accepted the decision of the majority rather than imposing his own will. The questions matched with the graph pointed out that I am a Group-based Type II leader like the production manager. Perhaps this can be attributed to the leadership influence of the organization I work for. The Leader-Member Exchange revolves around the relationship between a manager and other members of his team. The theory has defined three particular stages through which these relationships pass. These three stages are role taking, role making, and routinization (Deluga, 1989). Furthermore, this theory introduced the idea of in and out of group. Role taking is when newer members first join a team and managers assess their capabilities. In the second stage of role taking, managers segregate in-group and out group members after seeing the way the members work on a task or project. In the last stage, as the name suggests, routines are established between managers and team member. While in-group members work hard and may become shining stars, out-group members start disliking managers and maybe forced to start over again. In light of this theory, one can evaluate if they are a part of in-group or out-group members. Subsequently, one can observe the working patterns, and characteristics of in-group members to re-establish a healthy relationship with the manager and the group. I can classify myself as in-group member in my team as the manager trusts and expects me to meet high performance targets. He is quite co-operative, supportive and often lends advice on how I can further develop my skills and career, which again indicates that he considers me as an in-group member. References Charbonneau, D. (2004). Influence tactics and perceptions of transformational leadership. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 25(7), 565-576. Deluga, R. J. (1989). Leader-member exchange quality and effectiveness ratings: The role of subordinate-supervisor conscientiousness similarity. Group and Organization Management, 23(2), 189-216. Howell, J. P., & Dorfman, P. W. (1981). Substitutes for leadership: Test of a construct. Academy of Management Journal, 24, 714-728. Kotlyar, I., & Karakowsky, L. (2007). Falling Over Ourselves to Follow the Leader. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 14(1), 38-49. Odom, L., & Green, M. (2003). Law and the ethics of transformational leadership. Leadership and Organization Development Journal, 24(1/20), 62-69. Sahertian, P., & Soetjipto, B. E. (2011). Improving Employee's Organizational Commitment, Self-Efficacy, and Organizational Citizenship Behavior Through the Implementation of Task-Oriented and Relationship-Oriented Leadership Behavior. The Business Review 17(2), 48-60. Shin, S., & Zhou, J. (2003). Transformational leadership, conservation, and creativity: evidence from Korea. Academy of Management Journal, 46(6), 703-714. Read More