Types of Leadership - Assignment Example

? Leadership Introduction Leadership is a process that encompasses influencing others in a bid to pool together efforts or materials in order to achieve a common goal. Vroom & Jago (2007) hold that without influence there is no leadership. Therefore, the nature of interaction should be influential for the “act” to be termed as leadership. Kellerman (2004) in her book “Bad Leadership: What It Is, How It Happens, Why It Matters” postulates that the modern society has a distinctive description to leadership that may not reflect ideas humans had in the past on the same. In the 21st century and a greater part of the 19th century leadership has become an exercise void of coercion. Scholars have in the recent past; therefore, put forth lucrative ideas as to how one should describe leadership. The English philosopher Herbert Spencer states that society defines leadership; meaning leaders and their subsequent leadership traits are a product of pre-existing, existing and future societal rules, laws and norms. Granted, this description takes into account the subjective nature of all dynamic societies (Kellerman, 2004). Types of leadership Based on Herbert Spencer’s description it is imperative that there exists various forms of leadership to satisfy the different set of societal circumstances. There are, therefore, various forms of leadership styles that may occur in both the formal and informal setting. Discussed herein are four types of leadership: Autocratic leadership Bureaucratic leadership Democratic leadership Delegative leadership Transformational leadership I) Autocratic leadership Autocratic leadership is the form of leadership where the person in power exercises full control over individuals. Decisions are enforced by rewards and the fear of punishment. Also, communication tends to be primarily in one direction that is, from the leaders to the followers. The followers in this case have little control over matters even those very personal to them. This is because the leader allows very little or no input at all to the decisions they make (Clawson (2006). Application in work setting: Autocratic leadership does not provide for consultation and is, therefore, very beneficial when a project requires quick decision-making. Such projects are usually time sensitive or of weighty ethical significance such that one cannot afford to engage in controversial consultation. Change in society is inevitable but there are forces that hold it back. In a situation where quick change is needed this is the best form of leadership to adopt as it does not give room for stalling. The leader should be the most knowledgeable member of the group in order to cement their assertiveness. However, this form of leadership can cause followers to be subject to abuse by the leader. This is because the leader has so much power on their side. Secondly societies under this form of leadership are not cohesive as there is always conflict between the followers and the leaders. Finally, progression is hindered when autocratic leadership is in play. In most cases the leader makes decisions on their own, disregarding other peoples opinions that may be more lucrative hence hindering creativity (Kellerman, 2004). II) Bureaucratic Leadership In bureaucratic leadership, the leader is keen on ensuring that followers adhere to rules, regulations and procedures in an accurate and consistent manner. This leadership style emerges from the transactional theories, which base leadership on a system of rewards and punishments. The leader in this case expects that followers conduct themselves in a formal manner towards each other and even those outside their setting. The leader has certain distinct privileges that set them apart from the rest. This feature causes this form of leadership to be big on titles and roles. Adhering to the set rules results in reward while going against them may result in punishment or exclusion. This form of leadership flourishes over long periods and is, therefore, common in old establishment and societies for instance the catholic religion (Wren (1995). Application in work setting: This is very crucial for running establishments that deal with sensitive matters such as health, religion, and education. Such institutions require disciplined procedures and quality work. Other places where this form of leadership is viable include dangerous workplaces such as mines, oilrigs, construction sites and film sets because they require tight control over health and safety (Johnson & Hackman (2003). However, errors that result in failure are unacceptable in this form of leadership and this dehumanizes the system. In natural environments, people learn through their errors but in this system people are rigid and afraid to explore new territories lest they make mistakes. This also reduces the levels of creativity significantly. People also do not feel self fulfilled because they are too focused on staying on track to even enjoy the rewards of their success for instance in a task. Finally, the communication channels are crippled by the procedural nature such that it is hard to communicate between the leader and the followers and vice versa. III) Democratic leadership Democratic leadership is the opposite of autocratic leadership because it is more engaging for both the leader and the followers. This style is based on the participative theory of leadership that holds that the ideal leadership style is one that takes the input of others into account. This is to say that it allows for fair contribution from the person of authority and the members as they forge toward a common goal. Despite the air of fairness created by this form of leadership one should remember that the leader in most cases retains the final say when it comes to decision making (Kellerman, 2004). Application in work setting: From the democratic setting, creativity especially when seeking solutions to problems is very high. This is because of the two heads are better than one policy where all the group members contribute to group ideas and raise cohesiveness and increase productivity. Also, compared to autocratic leadership there is less chances of conflict within the followers and even with the leader because of increased morale. Nonetheless, this form of leadership has its downside. The first noted defect is the inability to effectively manage change. This is due to the fact that followers may be so divided on a matter that it is hard for the leader to make a decision as he or she has to take their opinions into consideration. The productivity of the group is reduced because there is slower decision making, diluted accountability and possible compromises designed to please everyone but are not the best solution (DuBrin, 2012). IV) Delegative leadership: Delegative leadership is also known as laissez-faire that means ‘allow them to do’. In this type of leadership, the leader exercise little control or influence but merely provides tools for the followers. The rest of the work such as resource management and decision making is left to the followers. The leader affords the followers freedom to do as they please with the assumption that the end goal will be met (DuBrin, 2012). Application in work setting: This form of leadership is effective when the followers are highly skilled and possess the ability to make lucrative decisions solely. This form of leadership allows the group members an opportunity for individual development. On the other hand, individuals may not be disciplined enough to uphold set out principles. This may cause members to do shoddy work because of being noncommittal, unskilled and lazy. Cohesiveness among the members is also minimal and morale is not consistent resulting in inefficiency or chaos (Vroom & Jago 2007). V) Transformational Leadership Very similar to charismatic leadership, leaders using the transformational leadership model have the ability to connect with his subordinates on an emotional level; therefore, arousing strong emotions in them. Their eloquence in speech also allows them to articulate their vision in a desirable manner that appeals to their followers. This leadership style hinges on followers’ need to identify with their leader who they hold in high regard (Avolio & Yammarion (2002). Application in work setting: Transformational leadership gives leaders the opportunity to act as a positive role model for their subordinates to emulate their actions. Through spearheading activities, the leader is able to influence the course followed by everyone. Moreover, these leaders are able to inspire motivation from their subordinates; meaning, the motivation levels are very high under this model of leadership (Tichy & Devanna (1990). Conclusion Most experts root for a blend between the mentioned forms of leadership. It is clear that the behaviourist approach of identifying leadership styles suffers from the problem that what constitutes an effective leadership style in one situation may not necessarily be so in another. Situational theory of leadership postulates that there is no best way to act (Cameron & Green (2008). The situation an individual is in, however, acts as a key guideline on how one should act. The leader’s task is, therefore, to choose a suitable approach for the given situation. Ideally, situational leadership borrows some aspects from the above mentioned leadership styles. The commonly borrowed factors include intellectual stimulation for both the leaders and the followers. This will ensure that their contributions remain relevant. Secondly, there is the aspect of individualized consideration. This principle allows members to value others opinions as much as their own and vice versa (Newstrom et al (2003). Finally, the leader should be able to practice inspirational motivation and idealized influence. This feature helps the leader make followers share the same feelings hence building oneness. This form of leadership is crucial when one needs to face the changing needs of the followers and external demands as it is more hands on (Vroom & Jago 2007). There is also cohesiveness among the members and this increases morale and subsequently, productivity. References: Avolio, B., Walumbwa, F., Weber, T. J. (2009). Leadership: Current Theories, Research, and Future Directions. Lincoln: University of Nebraska press. Avolio, B.J., & Yammarion, F.J. (2002). Transformational and Charismatic Leadership: The Road ahead. San Diego, C.A: Emerald. Cameron, E. & Green, M. (2008). Making Sense of Leadership: Exploring the Five Key Roles Used by Effective Leaders. Kogan Page Limited; Philadelphia, USA and London, UK. Clawson, J.G. (2006). Level Three Leadership: Getting below the Surface. (3rd ed.) Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson. DuBrin, A. J. (2012). Leadership: Research Findings, Practice, and Skills. New York: Cengage Learning. Jago, A. G., Vroom, V. H. (2007). The Role of the Situation in Leadership. American Psychologist, 17 - 24. Johnson, C. & Hackman, M. (2003). Leadership, a Communication Perspective (4th Edition). Waveland Press, New York Kellerman, B. (2004). Bad Leadership: What It Is, How It Happens, Why It Matters. Boston: Harvard Business Press. Mann, R. D. (1959). A review of the relationship between personality and performance in small groups. Psychological Bulletin, 56, (241-270) Newstrom, John W. & Davis, Keitu (1993). Organisational Behaviour: Human Behaviour at Work. New York: Mc-Graw Hill Tichy, N.M., & Devanna, M.A. (1990). The Transformational Leader. New York: John Wiley & Sons. Wren, J.T. (1995). The leader’s Companion: Insights on Leadership through the Ages. New York: The Free Press. Read More