The Leadership and Role of Organizational Motivation - Essay Example

? Module Managing in Organizations Assignment: A Critical Analysis of the Importance of Leadership & Motivation in Ministry of Regional Municipality & Water Resources Module No: Student Name: Submitted To: Professor: Date of Submission: Words Count: 5073 Assignment Question “Choose one or two areas covered in the Managing in Organization module and critically analyze them with reference to an organization in which you have worked.” Table of Contents Assignment Question 2 Table of Contents 3 Introduction 4 Ministry of Regional Municipality & Water Resources 5 Background 5 Management Theories 6 Managers and Leaders 7 Leadership Theory 9 My View of Leadership in MRMWR 10 Academic View of Leadership 11 Motivation Theories and Concept 13 Traditional Motivational Approaches 14 Leadership vs. Motivation 16 Conclusion and Recommendations 19 Reference List 20 Introduction Research works of modern management research scholars such as Dasborough and Ashkanasy (2002) and Yukl (2009) revealed the fact that leadership is all about social interaction between leader and follower where leaders influence followers by creating a relationship of mutual trust with followers. In such context, Yukl (2009) defined management as the systematic combination of control, system and procedures. Yukl (2009) argued that leadership is the combination of intuition, creativity, agility, optimism and adaptive mentality. Ironically, it is believed that excellent managers are capable of correcting a flawed procedure and making it perfect whereas excellent leaders are capable of performing correct actions to achieve the goal. Careful analysis of the research work of modern management scholars reveals the fact that over managing is a key characteristic of failing organizations because managers of these organizations manage unethical or flawed procedure in efficient manner in order to climb the wrong wall. For example, corporate & financial scandal of Nortel, Enron, Lehman Brothers etc are example of wrongly managed organizational procedures. Any discussion about management and leadership is incomplete without shedding light on role of motivation among organizational members to improve overall organizational productivity. Rurchgott and Furchgott (1999) defined motivation as the combination matrix of values, actions and attitude which can help an individual to perform in goal directed manner in order to achieve specific objective. Maslow (1943 and 1954) identified five types of human needs such as safety need, psychological need, satisfaction of the ego, social need and self-actualization which are required to be fulfilled in order to motivate an individual. It is evident from the argument of various research scholars that organizational leadership is a multidimensional context; therefore, it is difficult to understand the concept without establishing a standardized viewpoint. To understand the concept of organizational leadership in better manner, the researcher has decided to analyze and evaluate the growth of organizational “Leadership” over the course of time. Analyzing the leadership and role of organizational motivation by using various management theories will also be a key purpose of this essay. The researcher has previously worked in Ministry of Regional Municipality & Water Resources (MRMWR) hence MRMWR has been selected as sample organization in this paper. Throughout the essay, the researcher will evaluate how MRMWR uses leadership concept and motivational techniques in order to manage its employees. The researcher will also try to shed light on how the relationship between leadership and motivation works in synergistic manner to improve productivity and performance in MRMWR. Ministry of Regional Municipality & Water Resources Background Ministry of Regional Municipality & Water Resources (2013) has stated its functional responsibilities as guided by “Royal Decree No. 55/2006” and functional responsibility of MRMWR can be briefed in the following manner; 1. Formulating policies or process plan and designing programs in order to improve the work functions of Water Resources sectors and Municipalities. MRMWR also supervises the progress of implemented program and takes required corrective measures in order ensure smooth functioning of implemented program. 2. Working in coordination with local ministry in order to conduct research and studies related to respective fields is also part of the responsibility for MRMWR. The organization develops different work process map and collects key statistical data in order to help local government in decision making. MRMWR works in systematic manner in order to develop both constructional and infrastructure support for the governorates. 3. MRMWR works as safeguard for improving public health safety and environmental sanitation with the help of quality control measurement performed in its own laboratories. The organization also specializes in developing, assessing and managing water resources with the help of judicious consumption and exploitation of water sources. MRMWR emphasizes heavily on saving the water sources from getting exhausted by economizing the overall water consumption throughout different regions of the country. 4. The organization has established strategic partnership and collaboration with domestic and international organization in order to improve the efficiency of municipal and water services in the country. MRMWR also works as legislator in order to conduct modification in the proposed draft related to water resources by Ministerial department. 5. MRMWR delivers the training & development program to Ministerial department in order to help them to retain and develop existing human resources. The organization also works as the coordination medium for generating public awareness regarding Ministry’s work field and motivate people to coordinate with Ministerial department in critical policies. MRMWR also provides electronic services to create awareness about national policies among people of the country (Ministry of Regional Municipality & Water Resources, 2013). Management Theories The management of people within organization has moved from the secondary to middle stage. The involvement that human resources may create to an organization’s performance and success has turn into the issue of much study. Much of this transform has been linked to changes in the business Environment, with the force of globalization leading to the need for enhanced competitiveness, flexibility, superiority and the need for all functions of the business to express their contribution to the bottom line (Beadwell and Claydo, 2010). James Scouller (2011) viewed the dissimilarity between leadership and management as the fundamental problem for organizations. According to the scholar, leadership is related to establishment of an objective by the leader and motivating and inspiring followers to move in a particular direction order to achieve the purpose and bring change in the existing organizational process. Scouller (2011) classified management as systematic utilization of resources in order to bring stability in organizational process. Hence, it can be surmised that leadership is more about change while management is more about stability. However, interesting fact is that Scouller (2011) criticized the common belief of separating leadership from management. The scholar pointed out that leadership and management can be done by same people because leadership and management work in an interloped and overlapped manner. Managers and Leaders Humphreys (2005) rightly stated that leadership is much broader context than management and leadership exists from the dawn of human civilization while history of management is not more than 2000 years. Grace (2003) pointed out that the concept of management came to light after the industrial revolution in the west but leadership was exercised by Monarchs and community heads even before the industrial revolution. Hence it can be understood that, research on relationship between management and leadership is relatively new field of interest among research scholars. However, various management scholars given different management theories in order to guide organizations to achieve business success but global organizations cannot afford to rely on any one management theory in order to solve complex and multi dimensional business problems. Hence, in the next section, the researcher will try to understand how concept of leadership and management can be used by organizations to achieve business success. Kent (2005) pointed out that in modern business organizations, terms like leadership” and “management” are used in frequent and interchangeably manner. But actual fact is that, in many cases, such interchangeability creates confusion among management scholars and ultimately creates the fallacy all managers are able to become a good leader or even leader. Although Wren (2005) found a common relationship between management and leadership previous research scholars such as Zaleznik (1977) pointed out that there is significant divergence exist between leadership and management. Toor and Ofori (2008) viewed management from top management perspective and defined it as the combination of job responsibilities of different organizational departments. According to Toor and Ofori (2008), management consists of multiple steps such as planning the action, organizing activities and resources to achieve the purpose, coordinating activities and finally controlling the output. However, most of the research scholars still view management as systematic framework for organizations which help it organize its tangible and intangible resources in order to achieve business objectives. However, mechanistic model of management fails miserably when it comes to influence and motivate organizational members and employees to participate in a change management process. In such context, organizations seek the guidance of leadership in order to motivate its workforce in a common direction for achieving its business objective. Yukl (2009) pointed out those leaders use different power indices such as, 1-referent power- increasing loyalty and coordination between subordinates by using interpersonal skills, 2- reward power- increasing loyalty and motivation among workforce by providing them financial rewards, 3- legitimate power- influencing decision of organizational members by using the social status or job position etc in order to create a list of loyal followers. Some of the leaders use democratic leadership style to engage subordinates in the decision making process and the process actually empowers the subordinates. Yukl (2009) rightly noted that a good leader is able to bring sense of belongingness among workers which significantly reduces disobedience among followers. Successful integration of leadership is not only able to empower work forces but also able to make the nature of the work enjoyable among workers. Apart from motivating employees, modern business leaders also have the responsibility to manage business operation in ethical manner without hurting the interest of shareholders. Modern business world has seen how failure to conduct business in ethical manner has created problems for companies like Nortel, Enron, and Lehman Brothers. Hence, there is no surprise why modern management researchers are raising voice for ethical leadership. Kark and Van Dijk (2007) argued that ethical leadership is result of self regulatory behavior of business leaders. According to Kark and Van Dijk (2007), a business leader can develop ethical environment within the organization by integrating his/her moral value system to direct the behavior of followers. In such context, very few research scholars tried to understand the ethical role of managers when it comes to creating an honest and transparent environment within organization. Beadwell and Claydo (2010) criticized managers for making decisions on the basis of incomplete and deficient knowledge which ultimately increases vulnerability of the organization to external threats. Hence, there is no surprise why ethical leadership has never been viewed as part of management. Yukl (2009) stated that a leader can work in comprehensive manner in order to encourage subordinates to realize the mission and vision statement of the organization and coordinate with each other to work in direction with the vision statement. Such type of leadership is known as transformational leadership which encourages followers to work for common objectives. After reading this far in this essay, readers might get interested to know different theoretical models of leadership proposed by different research scholars. Well, next section of the study will try to underpin some of the theoretical leadership models in order to address the research problem in more holistic manner. Leadership Theory The researcher has identified two types of leadership theory such as path-goal leadership theory and transformational leadership theory as the two of the most important leadership theory that have been proposed by research scholars. Robert House (1971) proposed the path-goal theory of leadership which emphasizes on goal oriented behavioural aspect of leaders. On the basis of path-goal theory, leaders create task as situational variable in order to check whether employees are able to achieve the task or not? Path goal theory depends heavily on two theoretical models such as setting goal for subordinates and expectancy theory. In one hand, leaders following path goal leadership model establishes realistic but challenging goal for employees and motivates them by stating that they will get reward on accomplishment of such goals while on the other hand, it is expected that employees will give their best effort to achieve the goal if they value the reward (salary benefit, incentives, monetary reward or enhancement in responsibility) associated with achievement of such goal. Modern research scholars such as Yukl (2009) raised question on over dependency of path goal theory on human traits rather than understanding behavioural aspect of dimensions. House (1971) stressed on the fact that an effective leader is able to provide information-based and resource-based support to workers in order to motivate them to achieve the goal. According to path goal theory, leaders must have the capability to create a reward benefits which can be valued by team members otherwise the leader will not be able to motivate team members. Kouzes and Posner (2012) pointed out that expressive speeches about ordinary principles aren't sufficient for leaders. Leaders' activities are far more important than their expressions when constituents want to decide how stern leaders really are about what they declare. Terms and actions have to be consistent. Excellent leaders put the model by aligning actions with communal values. Through their daily actions, they show their strong dedication to their values and those of the association. Employees express their individual-most excellent leadership experiences as period when they envision an exciting, extremely attractive future. They have visions of what could be. They have the abilities to make amazing things happen. Every society or community movement begins with a dream or vision - it's the power that makes the future (Kouzes and Posner, 2012). false Kouzes and Posner (2012) stressed on the fact that emergence of latest technology and innovation of new products has created challenge for leaders to motivate employees to accomplish more. In modern marketplace, leaders can motivate employees by integrating ethical values, personal qualities, influencing capabilities not only to perform well but also to meet customer requirement in convincing manner. Bass (1997) proposed transformational leadership theory in order to identify how leaders can encourage team members to achieve organizational objectives. According to the scholar, leadership is worldwide phenomenon which can be affected by association and cultures. In an attempt to transform the association, the leaders have to imagine, facilitate, and allow (Bass, 1997). The vital thesis of this theory is that leaders have to motivate and develop supporters in order to struggle for an advanced collective. Bass (1997) stated that transformational leaders have the socialized charisma which helps them to perceive as powerful and confident among followers. Followers admire transformational leaders for their ethical standard and decision making capabilities and interesting fact is that, transformational leaders behave in way that can emulate the vision and mission statement of the organization. Transformational leaders recognize the needs of followers over their personal need and take necessary steps in order to satisfy the need of followers. My View of Leadership in MRMWR While I was working in MRMWR, I have understood the fact that top level management and organizational members of MRMWR emphasize heavily on leadership aspects in order to solve both operational and strategic problems. Top level management of MRMWR encourages managers at various departmental levels to empower their team members by creating relationship of mutual benefit and trust. Each team of the organization works as tactical building block to perform the required task in precise manner in order to help the organization to achieve its strategic objectives successfully. Minster of MRMWR emphasizes heavily on empowerment of individual organizational member and delegation of job responsibility is the key mantra for success of the organization. According to the core values of MRMWR, empowering employee means providing them the independence to make decisions in critical situation. It has been already mentioned that MRMWR works as public relation face of government and the organizations works with government bodies to create awareness among people about the national policy of government. Leaders of MRMWR synchronize the employee empowerment agenda with the mission and vision statement of government. Leaders and managers of various departments of MRMWR have the action agenda to identify macro-environmental variables which can influence the operational efficiency of the organization and use external opportunities to fulfil objective of the organization. According to my viewpoint, leaders of the organizations use path goal theory to motivate organizational members by linking their actions with the reward system. Social recognition, enhancement in job responsibility and financial rewards are use as general motivators by top level management of MRMWR to motivate employees to perform well. Academic View of Leadership Flamholz (1990) defined the consensual leadership is the approach characterized with authority and leadership. The leadership model can be understood in both ethnical and religious manner. In such context, it can be surmised that any form of directive leadership is derivative of structural evolution of civilization, religion and spiritual dimensions. We could notice that directive leadership in work places, that’s state (social harmony), might have a selection of meanings and implications. According to Aronson (2001), directive leadership is directly influenced by the cultural and social perspective of followers. In general, directive leadership is probably the most common type of leadership that can be found in real business environment. However, majority of research scholars criticized directive leadership as illegal and dogmatic kind of leadership. Incorporating the ethical norms and moral values can transform directive leaders to leaders with sound understanding of ethical principles. Restoring human rights can be regarded as opposite version of leadership style of a dictatorial leader which is probably the worse form of leadership style. In such context, Yukl (2009) stressed on the importance of servant leadership style where servant leaders focus more on listing to the needs of followers rather than prioritizing personal needs. In many cases, it has been observed that servant leaders are able to develop a positive work environment by showing compassion to followers and the emotional bonding between servant leaders and employees can enhance their engagement and devotion level towards the organization. For example, implementing servant leadership model could save Enron from getting into financial scandal which was caused by the unethical behavior of leaders who utilized loyalty of employee as tool for committing financial fraud. Lee-Davies et al. (2007) pointed out that shared leadership can be used by leaders to establish collaborative commitment level among followers which can not only empower them but also encourage them to help other team members to accomplish a common objective. Bligh et al. (2006) believed that shared leadership implies that management is enacted by multiple individuals irrespective of their hierarchical position. Authors asserted that shared leadership gives importance on the leadership capability to bond with others where we are achieving team’s objectives. Shared leadership could provide birth to "temporary leaders". Shared leadership means that everybody is choosing the leadership duties for which he or she feels ready to achieve. On the other hand, transactional leadership is an approach to treat other organizational individuals or employees as the way to achieve objectives without creating much scope for emotional bandings between leaders and followers. Transactional leadership is mechanistic framework of leadership where leaders expect benefits from followers in exchange of rewards. Pastor and Mayo (2008) revealed the fact that transactional leadership is the outcome of LMX theory or leader-member exchange model. According to the model, leaders expect that followers should only be rewarded if they make measurable and sufficient effort to achieve business objective or satisfy managerial requirements. Odom and Green (2003) argued that transactional leadership emphasizes more on controlling the activities of lower level employees. Hence, it can be conjectured that transactional leaders perceive bottom level of organizational hierarchy as the performance source whose action be directed by providing them rewards. Odom and Green (2003) highlighted the fact that being a transactional leader doesn’t mean that one has to use unethical means to bring performance from employees. Kanungo (2001) revealed the fact that some transactional leaders might use unethical means to bring performance from employees or even dehumanize them. Kanungo (2001) suggested that transactional leaders should not use unethical means to force employees to achieve organizational objectives because dehumanization might lead to disruption within organization. I have carefully observed and analyzed the leadership practices performed across different departments of MRMWR. To be honest, I was to fail to found any long term leadership approach in various departments within the organization. Rather, I found that most of the managers use contingency approach as to solve operational problems. Such kind of approach can be viewed as the source for situational leadership practices that have been regularly performed in MRMWR. According to my knowledge, the organization maintains lattice structure in order to create scope for its managers to perform leadership role whenever it is required. There is no unanimous leader in the organization rather individual team member often emerges as situational leader within the organization. Employees of MRMWR can become leader by using personal knowledge, skill set and expertise to lead other team members to solve a particular organizational problem during contingent situation. It is evident from the success and high level of productivity of MRMWR that top level management of the organization has successfully implemented contingency leadership model to encourage employees to perform in right direction. Each of the organizational members also views contingency approach as the opportunity to showcase their leadership skills. Hence, it can be said that MRMWR successfully integrated a contemporary leadership approach to improve its operational efficiency. Motivation Theories and Concept Literature review and historical data show that the term “motivation” is derived from Latin phrase ‘movere’, which means to move or displace something. Psychologists rightly defined motivation as being an intangible stimulus which can help an individual to perform seemingly difficult task. Research scholars found that motivation is a multifaceted term and an individual can be motivated by use of different means. Aram and Piraino (1978) stated that there can be two areas in employee motivation. For example, first area in motivational research deals with identifying content factors for motivation while second are in motivational research deals with psychological processes for getting motivated or cognitive process map for motivation. Analyzing research work of previous research scholars reveals that “need hierarchy theory” proposed by Maslow (1943) and “motivation-hygiene theory” proposed by Herzberg et al (1957 and 1959) and Herzberg (1966) are two monumental achievements in the field of motivational research. In the next section, the researcher will try to shed light on both the theory in order to understand their practical implication in real world business situation. Maslow believed that there are at least five sets of goals which can be referred to as critical requirements and these goals can be classified as physiological, safety, love, esteem, and self-actualization. Maslow (1943) declared that community (including employees at organizations) is motivated by the aspiration to achieve or maintain the variety of environment upon which these critical satisfactions rest and by convinced more intellectual wishes. Humans are a continuously wanting group. Typically the fulfilment of these desires is not overall equally exclusive, but only tends to be. The average member of community is most often partially pleased and in some measures, being displeased in all of one's wants (Maslow, 1943). Traditional Motivational Approaches Research work of McClelland (1961 and 1964) created the background for the need hierarchy theory of Maslow. McClelland (1961 and 1964) pointed out that employees might execute a particular behaviour in the workplace in order to satisfy their personal needs. The scholar suggested that organizational leaders should identify such needs and try to satisfy such needs in order to keep workforce motivated. Although Maslow (1943 and 1954) stated five types of human needs but in most of the cases it has been found that it is next to impossible to satisfy all the five needs of a human being due to the fact that a human being immediately develop next needs as the previous needs get satisfied. (Source: Koontz and Weihrich, 2006, p. 290) In the need hierarchy theory, five types of need can be briefed as, 1- Psychological Needs- most fundamental need for survival such as sex, hunger, sleep etc, 2- Safety Needs- need for health related safety and social security, 3- Acceptance Needs- needs regarding belongingness of an individual with his/her social groups, 4- Esteem Needs- personal desire of an individual to get recognition and reward in workplace and 5- Self Actualization- need of becoming super achiever who can achieve everything in life. Schneider and Alderfer (1973) criticized need hierarchy theory for not answering two basic problems such as how human development theory can be used to satisfy need of an individual and how the model can be conceptualized in real world business environment. Alderfer (1967 and 1972) proposed ERG theory to address the problem areas that were not covered by Maslow’s need hierarchy model. ERG theory had three basic components such as, 1- Existence- safety and psychological need of an individual, 2- Relatedness- desire of an individual to become member of a social group and 3- Growth- need of a person to learn new thing and grow personally. In such context, Herzberg et al. (1959) gave two factor theories in order to identify how job satisfaction for employees can work as motivation drivers for them. According to the hygiene factor theory, there two factors such as hygiene factors” and “motivators” which can be used by organizational leaders to motivate employees. Hygiene factors- exogenous variables such as supervision, administration, salary, working conditions, monetary benefits, and job designs can motivate an individual in extrinsic and temporary manner. Motivators- endogenous variables such nature of work, recognition in the workplace, personal development and achievement can motivate an employee in intrinsic and sustainable manner. The relationship between Maslow’s need hierarchy model and Hertzberg’s two factor theory can be depicted in the following manner. (Source: Koontz and Weihrich, 2006, p. 292) In context to above discussion, motivational practices within various department of MRMWR can be understood. I have found that the organization doesn’t follow any traditional motivational theories for motivating its workforce to improve their performances. Generally, reinforcement approach is extensively used by management of the organization to motivate large pool of employees. Common reward systems have been used in order to link performance of employees with perceived benefits. Increased production output of MRMWR is showing that the organization has quite successfully adopted the reinforcement approach. Leadership vs. Motivation Research scholars such as Judge et al. (2002) pointed out that a leader can motivate followers or employees through the leadership style and integration of emotional bonding. In organizations, an individual employee can get motivated by the leadership style of a transformational leader or the expert power indices of a leader. In some cases, it has been observed that a charismatic leader can influence behaviour of employees by showing attitude. Chan and Drasgow (2001) stated that a leader can even show motivation to lead (MTL) or self help to employees in the workplace. For example, a high ranked officer in military can even help junior soldiers during war time and such situational leadership models are good examples for showing how leadership can be used as motivator. When it comes to bringing out the best in your staff, coaching and leadership rank side-by-side. According to modern research scholars, coaching along with e-learning represents the largest impacting factors when it comes to motivate an employee in systematic manner. Add to this the need for inspirational leadership, and coaching is no longer seen as a shiny perk for top managers, to be bragged about along with their high-performance company car. Chan and Drasgow (2001) also pointed out that unless a leader clearly communicates the mission and vision stamen to employees and followers then there is high possibility that the leader might fail to create a common understanding about the vision statement among employees. Shared understating of the leadership agenda among workers is the most important requirement for organizations to achieve business objectives through human resource deployment. For example, A.G Lafley (CEO of Procter & Gamble) conducted various knowledge sessions for employees while took the agenda to change its global business structure. Hence, a leader should be participating in the personal development process of employees in order to create a shared understanding of the leadership agenda. Judge et al. (2002) rightly identified that employees in the organization cannot move in a direction less manner hence leaders should establish the direction for employees in order to link their interest with organizational interest. Different leadership styles can be linked with motivational trait in the following manner; Leadership Style versus Motivation Leadership Style Nature of Motivation Basis of Motivation Dimension of Personality Efficiency Factor Minimum amount of supervision Empowering workers to make decisions by themselves Motivation in self driven manner Creativity Democratic nature of leadership and also maintain the flair of transformational leadership. These leaders believe in relationship between individual independence and creativity Such kind of leadership is able to motivate employees through engaging them in critical decision making process. Comprehensive motivation of the team Combination of high degree of supervision and lower degree of supervision Goal centred transactional types of leadership. Career opportunity Motivation among employees depends on their perceived value of reward and recognition promised by leaders. Hence the model is moderately successful in motivating employees. Rewards play important role in linking the performance of employees with expectation of management Materialistic benefits Recognition of effort for employees in the workplace also pertinent variable in the model. Rise in social status High degree of supervision on work performance of employees Command-and-control over every direction of actions of employees Employees try to copy other’s work culture in order to be successful To become part of the successful professional peer group in the workplace Such kind of job cannot motivate employees to perform well and scope of creativity among employees gets reduced by such kind of leadership Employees try to follow the policy guideline of the organization Following policy blindly in order to perform the task Leaders use coercive power on employees to get the job done Fear of losing the job (Source: Motivation-Tools, 2013) Conclusion and Recommendations It is evident from the above discussion that leadership plays vital for any organizational strategy because leadership and management work in interlinked manner. A team leader has to encourage and coordinate activity of team members in order to both tactical and strategic objectives. In such context, motivation is a powerful tool for leaders to engage workers to achieve innovation and improve performance. In MRMWR, management uses contingency approach and joint leadership style in order to empower employees as the integrated part of management decision making process. The organization should use individual performance based reward and recognition policy rather than using standard reward policies in order to recognize the effort of individual employee in the workplace. Although MRMWR rises salary of employees in periodic manner in order to help employees to deal with inflation and commodity price rise but still there is scope for the organization to implement balance scorecard approach link reward with performance in measurable manner. Careful analysis of the motivational aspect in MRMWR reveals the fact that organization use unorthodox version of Maslow’s need hierarchy model and Herzberg’s hygiene factor model to link leadership with motivation among workers. Reference List Alderfer, C. P., 1967. Convergent and discriminant validation of satisfaction and desire measures with and without preceding interviews. Journal of Applied Psychology, 51, pp. 509-20. Alderfer, C. P., 1972. Human needs in organizational settings. New York, NY: The Free Press of Glencoe. Aram, J. and Piraino, T., 1978. The hierarchy of needs theory: An evaluation in Chile. International Journal of Psychology, 12(2), pp. 179-188. Aronson, E., 2001. Integrating leadership styles and ethical perspectives. Canadian Journal of Administrative Sciences, 18(4), pp. 244-56. Bass, B. M., 1997. Does the transactional-transformational paradigm transcend organizational and national boundaries? American Psychologist, 52, pp. 130-9. Beardwell, J. and Claydon, T., 2010. Human resource management: A contemporary approach. 5th ed. London: Financial Times/Prentice Hall. Bligh, M. C., Pearce, C. L. and Kohles, J. C., 2006. The importance of self- and shared leadership in team based knowledge work. A meso-level model of leadership dynamics. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 21(4), pp. 296-318. Chan, K. Y. and Drasgow, F., 2001. Toward a theory of individual differences and leadership: Understanding the motivation to lead. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86(3), pp. 481-98. Dasborough, M. T. and Ashkanasy, N. M., 2002. Emotion and attribution of intentionality in leader-member relationships. The Leadership Quarterly, 13(5), pp. 615-34. Flamholz, E. G., 1990. Pains: How to make the transition from an entrepreneurship to a professionally managed firm. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Grace, M., 2003. Origins of leadership: The etymology of leadership. Guadalajara, Jalisco: Annual Conference of the International Leadership Association. Herzberg, F., 1966. Work and the nature of man. Cleveland: World Publishing. Herzberg, F., Mausner, B. and Peterson, R. D., 1957. Job attitudes: Review of research and options. Pittsburgh, PA: Psychological Service of Pittsburgh. Herzberg, F., Mausner, B. and Snyderman, B. B., 1959. The motivation to work. 2nd ed. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons. Humphreys, J. H., 2005. Contextual implications for transformational and servant leadership: A historical investigation. Management Decision, 43(10), pp. 1410-31. Judge, T. A., Ilies, R., Bono, J. E. and Gerhardt, M. W., 2002. Personality and leadership: A qualitative and quantitative review. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(4), pp. 765-80. Kanungo, R. N., 2001. Ethical values of transactional and transformational leaders. Canadian Journal of Administrative Sciences, 18(4), pp. 257-65. Kark, R. and Van Dijk, D., 2007. Motivation to lead, motivation to follow: The role of the self-regulatory focus in leadership processes. Academy of Management Review, 32(2), pp. 500-28. Kent, T. W., 2005. Leading and managing: It takes two to tango. Management Decision, 43(7/8), pp. 1010-7. Koontz, H. and Weihrich, H., 2006. Essentials of management. New York City: McGraw-Hill Education. Kouzes, J. M. and Posner, B. Z., 2012. The leadership challenge: How to make extraordinary things happen in organizations. Hoboken, New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons. Lee-Davies, L., Kakabadse, N. K. and Kakabadse, A., 2007. Shared leadership: Leading through Polylogue. Business Strategy Series, 8(4), pp. 246-53. Maslow, A. H., 1943. A theory of human motivation. Psychological Review, 50, pp. 390-6. Maslow, A. H., 1954. Motivation and personality. New York, NY: Harper. McClelland, D. C., 1961. The achieving society. Princeton, NJ: Van Nostrand. McClelland, D. C., 1964. The roots of consciousness. Princeton, NJ: Van Nostrand. Ministry of Regional Municipality & Water Resources., 2013. Specialties. [online] Available at: [Accessed 1 July 2013]. Motivation-Tools., 2013. Leadership Styles versus Motivation. [online] Available at: [Accessed 2 July 2013]. Odom, L. and Green, M. T., 2003. Law and the ethics of transformational leadership. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 24(2), pp. 62-9. Pastor, J. C. and Mayo, M., 2008. Transformational leadership among Spanish upper echelons. The role of managerial values and goal orientation. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 29(4), pp. 340-58. Rurchgott, E. and Furchgott, M. W., 1999. Aging and human motivation. New York, NY: Plenum. Schneider, B. and Alderfer, C. P., 1973. Three studies of measures of need satisfaction in Organizations. Administrative Science Quarterly, 18, pp. 489-505. Schneider, B. and Alderfer, C. P., 1973. Three studies of measures of need satisfaction in Organizations. Administrative Science Quarterly, 18, pp. 489-505. Scouller, J., 2011. The three levels of leadership: How to develop your leadership presence, knowhow and skill. Gloucestershire: Management Books. Toor, S. and Ofori, G., 2008. Leadership versus management: How they are different and why. Leadership and Management in Engineering, April, pp. 61-71. Wren, D. A., 2005. The history of management thought. 5th ed. London: Wiley. Yukl, G., 2009. Leadership in organizations.7th ed. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall. Zaleznik, A., 1977. Managers and leaders: Are they different? Harvard Business Review, May-June, pp. 67-78. Read More