The Effectiveness of Different Leadership Styles - Case Study Example

? Organization and Behaviour Introduction The actual context and functionalities of leadership in organizational context has long been debated among research scholars due to the fact that till date, none of the researcher has been able to provide a standardized definition of leadership which can work in equally efficient manner for different organizations. In such backdrop, Zacharatos, Barling and Iverson (2005) argued that there cannot be one leadership style that can fit the purpose of different organization hence effectiveness of different leadership style in different organization varies significantly. To prove the argument, Zacharatos, Barling and Iverson (2005) contrasted leadership style effectiveness in high-performance work systems as against organizations where performance measurement is comparatively flexible. Due to presence of such divergence in leadership effectiveness in different organizational context, in the next section, the study will dig deep in the topic in order to gain meaningful insights. Task 2 2.1 Compare the Effectiveness of Different Leadership Styles in Different Organisations Armstrong (2009) and Yukl (2009) defined leadership as the systematic or intuitive initiatives of particular individuals to inspire and motive other organizational members to hollow the direction of the particular individual which can help the entire team to achieve organizational objectives. On contrary, consideration of research work of Rees and French (2010) reveals the fact that leadership is personal characteristics of social or organizational members blended with certain skills such as charismatic personality, interactive and engaging communication styles, interpersonal skills, decision making capabilities during contingent period, showing empathy towards team members problems, team building approach and knowledge sharing capabilities. In such context, the study will compare the leadership style in British Telecom as against leadership style in Apple. In case of British Telecom, organizations leaders have developed BT Skills Transition Centre which supervises the redeployment of human resources, skills and tangible resources (Ukwon, 2008). During major organizational restructuring, “Transition Managers” were being given responsibilities to manage resources in BT Skills Transition Centre. In most of the occasions, organizational leaders in British Telecom use the transformational leadership styles in order to achieve the change objectives such as develop the global IP platform which can work in effective manner, being number 1 in terms of customer services across 170 countries of operation and increase responsiveness throughout the value chain operation (Ukwon, 2008). In such context, leaders of British Telecom used transformational leadership style by involving the employees during contingent decision phases in order to deploy change initiatives such as, 1- implement new internal trading model, 2- develop new organizational structure, 3- integrate a global business operation model, 4- implement faster re-engineering process, 5- extend worldwide 21CN IP platform and 6- develop knowledge sharing collaborative culture within organization (Ukwon, 2008). As part of transformational leadership culture in British Telecom (BT), a team has been developed to measure Organisational Culture Index (OCI) while as part of transformational leadership in BT, sub-leadership styles like aggressive defensive, passive defensive and constructive were adopted by managers. In case of transformational leadership style in British Telecom (BT), leaders shown some common characteristics such as encouraging team members to communicate with each other for knowledge sharing, delivering customer focused solutions, encouraging best practice, identifying strategic priorities (Ukwon, 2008). On contrary, in case of Apple which one of the largest Consumer electronics company in the world, the concept of leadership very person specific. Steve Jobs being considered as pioneer leader for the rise and growth of Apple Inc. For Apple, charismatic leadership style of Steve Jobs being used to motivate subordinates to put their potential and creativity to achieve innovation in terms of product design and converting the company from product manufacturer to seller of “customer experience”. Steve Jobs was an adamant risk taker when it comes to making decision in contingent period. For example, Steve Jobs took the risk to establish partnership with Microsoft in order to increase market penetration for Apple and the idea clicked. The leader also showed high degree of emotional attachment to subordinates by recognizing effort of every team members in the success of Apple products (Rosenbach and Taylor, 2006). It is evident from the above discussion that significant amount of divergence exist between leadership style in British Telecom (BT) as against Apple while the difference of effectiveness of leadership style has also directed by situational and business requirements. 2.2 Explain How Organisational Theory Underpins the Practice of Management According to Robbins and Judge (2007) and Thompson and McHugh (2002), business managers and organizational theories knowingly or unknowingly use different organizational theories such as scientific management theory, administrative theories, system approach, bureaucracy model, contingency approach and chaos theory in every day management practices. In such context, Thompson and McHugh (2002) argued that successful implementation of any organizational theory requires engagement from both managers and workers within work environment. For example, in case of Contingency Perspective of management (modern organizational theory), managers need to incorporate subordinates and organizational members in the decision process in order to achieve the flexibility to adapt particular management in accordance with demographic shifts, occurrence of uncertain events, cultural divergence, technological shifts etc (Thompson and McHugh, 2002). Therefore, it can be said organizational theories not only guide but also control effectiveness of particular management practices. 2.3 Evaluate the Different Approaches to Management Used by Different Organisations Consideration of research work of Thompson and McHugh (2002) reveals the fact that there can be three different management approaches being adopted by organizations. 1- Classical Approach: Fayol (1916) was the pioneer of this approach which focuses on planning, organizing, collaborating and controlling functions within management practices. In case of classical approach, concepts regarding use of technological capabilities, stepwise thinking, resource planning are also being incorporated. 2- Human Relations Approach: according to the model, organizational leaders should focus more on developing culture within organization, study human behaviours, interpersonal skill development, organizational dynamics and team building in order to integrate human resource aspect in management practices. 3- Systems Approach: Bertalanffy (1968) gave this concept and according to the concept, organizations are being divided into different divisions (sub-systems) in accordance with their job responsibilities and functionalities. Small divisions within organization are being considered as subsystem of large organizational system. For example, Human Relations Approach being followed in case of British Telecom (BT) while Systems Approach being followed in case of Apple Inc (Ukwon, 2008). Task 3 3.1 Discuss the Impact that Different Leadership Styles may have on Motivation in Organisations in Periods of Change Different leadership styles can be discussed briefly in order to develop theoretical background for further discussion. 1- Autocratic Leadership- in such leadership style, leaders show dogmatic attitude and they make decision without consulting subordinates and the command mode is only one directional (Yukl, 2009). 2. Bureaucratic Leadership- leaders just follow the written work manuals and company principles to guide the work of subordinates and personal involvement of the leaders is very less in such leadership style (Wong and Law, 2002). 3. Charismatic Leadership- in such leadership style, leaders use their charismatic personality to bring energy in the team and motivate team members to follow leadership direction (Judge et al., 2002). 4. Democratic/Participative Leadership- in such leadership style, leaders include team members in the decision making process and listen to suggestion of team members while making the decision. Democratic leaders empower team members to make decisions in contingent period which increase engagement level of team members which might not be achieved by providing financial rewards (Yukl, 2009). 5. Servant Leadership- a small scale team leader can emerge as "servant leader" by meeting the requirements of team, involving every team members in organizational objective achievements and lead by being an example of integrity and generosity (Armstrong, 2009). 6- Transactional Leadership- in such leadership style, leaders motivate subordinates by only providing financial rewards, incentives or even punishment and leaders do not establish emotional attachment with team members or neither there is scope for knowledge sharing (Yukl, 2009). 7- Transformational Leadership- probably the most comprehensive leadership style where leaders feel the urgency of changing the existing organizational system, formulate the vision for the change, develop plan for the change and motivate team members to give their 100% potential in the change process (Armstrong, 2009; Wolff, Pescosolido and Druskat, 2002). It is evident from the above discussion that varieties of leadership are being used in different organizations in order to address different organizational problems. Yukl (2009) and Wolff, Pescosolido and Druskat (2002) suggested that organizational leaders can select different leadership style to motivate organizational members to involve and engage in change management process. In such context, Belbin’s (1981) Team Roles Theory can be used to understand the impact being created by leadership style on motivation of team members. According to Belbin’s Team Roles Theory and research review of IRS Employment Review (1995), organizational leaders play vital role in motivating team members to form team that can drive change initiatives and reduce resistances from team members to change process. Consideration of Team Roles Theory of Belbin’s (1981) reveals the fact that organizational leaders can use transformational leadership , servant leadership model and participative leadership styles to incorporate 6 steps in team formation during change process such as, 1- defining role of team members, 2- developing and nourishing unique team building concept, 3- process plan development, 4- checking the optimal team building idea in context to their practical consequence, 5- communicating the change objectives in interactive manner to team members and coordinating their activities and 6- establishing behavioural equilibrium between different team members. Therefore, it can be said from above theoretical consideration that leaders can use transformational leadership, servant leadership model and participative leadership styles to influence motivation of team members during change process. 3.2 Compare the Application of Different Motivational Theories within the Workplace In the management literature, different motivational theories being introduced at different points of time in order to guide how managers can motivate workers in workplace and many of the theories have been considered as valid in real life scenario. Some well known theories are Herzberg’s motivation-hygiene theory, Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs model, Alderfer’s ERG (Existence needs, Relatedness needs and Growth needs) Theory and Vroom’s expectancy theory. However, the study will only focus on Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs model in order to address the research problems in pertinent manner. Maslow (1943) defined five types of human needs such as safety need, physiological need, satisfaction of the ego, social need and self-actualization. Figure 1: Hierarchy of Needs model (Source: Koontz and Weihrich, 2006, p. 290) Physiological Needs- basic instincts or primal human needs such as sex, hunger, thirst etc. Organizations can provide sufficient remuneration to employees which might help them to fulfil mentioned physiological needs and that might keep employees motivated for certain period of times. Safety Needs- human need regarding living a financially, emotionally and physically secure life and organizational leaders can fulfil such needs by increasing safety and facilities within workplace. Acceptance Needs- this is social need which focuses on sharing bonding with colleagues, team members and social groups, while organizations can fulfil the need by developing the culture of collaboration and team building within workplace. Esteem Needs- individualistic desire for getting accolades, credits and recognition for the work being done by them and organizational leaders can satisfy the need by providing promotion, reward or increase in job responsibilities for team members. Self Actualization- ultimate stage of need of individual for achieving every desire and requirements in life and fulfilling such need is beyond the hand of organizations. 3.3 Evaluate the Usefulness of a Motivation theory for Managers Although, Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs is very famous for its simplicity and wide use in social sciences but from managers’ perspectives, the model lacks the predictability and specificity to mention what exactly needs to be done in order to motivate employees. Therefore, significant amount of doubt exist over the usefulness of Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs for managers to motivate employees. Another thing is that Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs model was being created for addressing general human needs which might not show symmetry with needs of organizational members in different business contexts. In such context, managers need to consider “hygiene factors” and “motivators” of Herzberg’s (1966) motivation-hygiene theory to motivate workers. For example, as part of hygiene factors, managers can use job design, working conditions, company policies, financial rewards etc to motivate workers while as part of Motivators, managers can use variety in job responsibilities, workplace empowerment, personal development program etc to motivate workers in effective manner. Conclusion In this essay, the researcher has analyzed different concepts regarding leadership, motivation and organizational behaviours in order to understand significance of these concepts in context to real world organizations like British Telecom and other companies. The study has found that leadership can change its form and application with the change in business objectives of organizations. In most of the cases, organizational leaders play vital role in motivating team members in transition phase or major structural change process. In conclusion, it can be said that the study has found relationship between ability of leaders to motivate employees and enhancement of organizational capability to achieve business success. Reference List Armstrong, M., 2009. A handbook of human resource management practice. London: Kogan Page. Belbin, R.M., 1981. Management teams: Why they succeed or fail. Oxford, U.K: Butterworth Heinemann. Bertalanffy, L. V., 1968. General system theory: Foundations, development, applications. New York, NY: Braziller. Fayol, H., 1916. Administration industrielle et geAneArale. Bulletin de la Societe de l’Industrie Minerale, Fifth Series, 10(3), pp. 5-162. Herzberg, F., 1966. Work and the Nature of Man. Cleveland: World Publishing. IRS Employment Review., 1995. Key Issues in Effective Team working. IRS Employment Review, 592, pp. 5-16. 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. Koontz, H. and Weihrich, H., 2006. Essentials of management. New York City: McGraw-Hill Education. Maslow, A. H., 1943. A theory of human motivation. Psychological Review, 50, pp. 390-6. Rees, G. and French, R., 2010. Leading, managing & developing people. London: CIPD. Robbins, S. and Judge, T., 2007. Organizational behavior. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall. Rosenbach, W. and Taylor, R., 2006. Contemporary issues in leadership. Boulder: Westview Press. Thompson, P. and McHugh, D., 2002. Work organizations: A critical introduction. 3rd ed. Basingstoke: Palgrave. Ukwon., 2008. Case study BT UK. [pdf] DG Employment. Available at [Accessed 17 December 2013]. Wolff, S. B., Pescosolido, A. T. and Druskat, V. U., 2002. Emotional intelligence as the basis of leader emergence in self-managing teams. The Leadership Quarterly, 13(5), pp. 505-22. Wong, C. S. and Law, K. S., 2002. The effects of leader and follower emotional intelligence on performance and attitude: An exploratory study. The Leadership Quarterly, 13(3), pp. 243-74. Yukl, G., 2009. Leadership in organizations. Global Edition. New Jersey: Pearson Education. Zacharatos, A., Barling, J. and Iverson, R. D., 2005. High-performance work systems and occupational safety. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90(1), pp. 77-93. Read More