Command and Control Leadership - Essay Example

Command and Control Leadership Lecturer: Introduction There are various forms of methods applied in the leading and directing of groups of people, especially in an organization setting. The size of a team does not matter so long as the leadership style applied is reliable and productive. Common and control leadership style is a commonly adopted style of leadership in management and other forms of leadership. This was a major leadership style of leadership in the 20th century. This form of leadership streams from the past industrial age when there was need to properly manage and lead troops in the world wars. The military leadership also contributed to the creation of this form of leadership. According to Gill (2010, 34), this is a reliable form of leadership because of the pivotal role it plays in resolving of conflicts within an organization. The repetition aspect associated with this leaderships style guarantees efficiency. Additionally, his style enables the subjects to obey commands of their seniors unconditionally. This has enabled many organizations, including Toyota, thrive and implement change without any problems. This also enables easy decision making given that there are no hardliners in the context of these leadership styles. This method works well in company like Toyota because it has an assembly line in its production process. Campbell, and Samiec (2009, 45), assert that this form of leadership style is autocratic but it is productive. This is partly because it enhances the easy decision making. In this respect, strategic decisions are made by technocrats without political influence within the organization. This style enables easy controlling and supervision of employees of Veracity pact. This aspect has helped transform the organization to be the best performing firm in the whole industry. According to European Conference on Management, Leadership and Governance, and Grant (2008, 67), it is hard to trust employees fully because theory X stipulates that if an employee is given a chance, he will avoid work at all cost. This necessitates the need for close supervision and this is the basis for the operation command and control leadership style. Dukes, Firehock, and Birkhoff (2011, 53) conjecture that good leadership can never give orders contrary to the welfare and going concern of an organization. In this respect, command and control style is appropriate to apply in many organizations. Leadership consists of independence of thought, integrity and determination in execution of duties. According to United States (2005, 47), a leader has to make informed decisions based on the situation at hand, hence he should focus on the objectives of the firm. The theories of organizational behavior apply in the organizational strikes and leadership. For instance theory –x, describes employees who will avoid work if given the opportunity. This is the behavior of the workers in the Asian continent. Olson and Singer (2008, 64) posit that they need supervision in order for them to perform their duties properly. In leadership, the leader should show a good example to his subjects in order for them to emulate and behave as required of them. The command and control style is where the leaders apply the organization laws in leading the employees. It lacks flexibility and it leads to strikes and lack of creativity among the employees. According to Jewell, and Whicker (2010, 29), this style provides a chance for improvement because people are promoted based on their qualifications. It also embraces the rule of law, justice and fairness. This makes the employees work hard, but not smart. According to Wheatley (2007, 50), command and control leadership reduces accidents, which occur because of rowdy employees within the firm. For instance, in a product base firm, the promotions are based on the number of products an employee has produced. Therefore, this may be self-hurting to some employees. The machines and equipment can also be messed up in the course of hurrying to produce more products. According to Perez and Barkhurst (2012, 62), command and control gives the leader all powers within the organization, but this denies the employees an opportunity to communicate their grievances freely because of fear of indictment. This style usually applies in a bureaucratic organization structure whereby the set organizational rules apply regardless of the nature of a situation. This style leads to employees not turning up at work and sometimes it results to decline of the job altogether. The leading of employees is easy given that the leader is provided with appropriate information and ideas to enable him to make the correct decisions without blundering. The workers adopt the aspect of work etiquette and compliance with the rules and regulations of an organization. According to Avery (2009), this style hampers self-drive and creativity among the workers. This method is also expedient thus it is reliable in many aspects. The advantage with this style is that it makes controlling of many employees. If all the employees are not guided all of them will pursue their own objectives to the detriment of the overall organizations goals. Moreover, a leader is supposed to be an icon of peace and guidance within the organization (Fernando, 2007, 39). Order and sanity should prevail. The rule and regulation of the organization should apply to all employees. The employees are bound to comply with the set guidelines in order to win the confidence of the management (Flamholtz, 2006, 61). The working conditions of the employees should be above the required standards by the health sector. This will reduce the cases of drop outs and switching of employees to different organizations in search of accommodating employers. The leaders should also recognize the employees by name because this boosts the morale of the employees. Furthermore, there should be coordination of the employees. This assists especially in cases of grievances amongst employees. This reduces tension and depression among employees because they cannot work when stressed. Guidance and counseling should be readily available to the errant employees instead of punishing and sending them packing. The employees should be indulged by their leader in co-curricular activities in order to build up synergy and the team spirit in the workplace. According to Baker (2011, 50), this style also leads to loss of certainty among the workforce. In this respect their jobs are not guaranteed because their job security is pegged on their obedience to the rules and regulations of the organization. There is also a clear disparity between the management and the workers. For instance, in Veracity Ltd. only management team participates in the strategic decision making and does other crucial roles of the organization whereas the employees take part in operational duties. Baril, M., & Murray (2007, 47), assert that the command and control leadership style culminates in the development of a culture within an organization whereby the employees are viewed as inferior to the management. In the long-run this has led to negative attitudes between the management and the workforce. Unfortunately, this has had a negative impact on the firm. The command and control style is appropriate in the emergency agencies like the police and ambulance services. This owes to the fact that the type of operation in these cases is not subject to elaborative discussions. These agencies operate on an ad hoc basis; hence the need for decision making is eliminated. This style hampers any kind of transformation of an enterprise because it is based on the status quo. The style also does not take into account the emotional welfare of employees. In this respect, it fosters resistance within organizations. This is unhealthy subject to business going concern. According to Saleem (2010, 74), optimum utilization of organization resources cannot be realized when employees are not motivated to deliver the service. This style is also based on vertical communication, which is subject to bureaucracy. This style ensures that there is minimal variation between control of human behavior and the overall planed goals of the organization. This is due to the fact that all the employees are focused on achieving the pre-planned goals of an organization. The operation of this style of leadership is based on mundane assumptions. Siebens (2007, 54) claims that in command and control style, leaders are monopolies of knowledge. This is fictional because of the human nature of leaders. The markets are subject to the dynamism of business, thus the style is not reliable. Change must occur in order to give way to new ideas and innovations, which result in improvement in productivity of an organization. On the other, hand this form of leadership encourages purpose-driven performance in firms. This gives the leaders a chance to correct variations in various points of performances. The assumption that employees can never give constructive guidance in the running for the organization is wrong because employees understand the grass root climate of the organization better than management. This involves processes and arrangements that are made with regard to the achievement of the organizational roles. Indeed, leadership contributes to better performance of an organization. Leadership within an organization entails initiation of actions. This marks the start of the mandate of a leader figure within the organization. In addition the leader is expected to motivate the employees through extension of various forms of incentives into them. Then he or she should ensure that the objectives of the employees do not override the corporate organizational goals. For instance, the employees should not be seeking bonus and allowances when the company is running at losses. The command and control style fosters synergy within the organization. This is because all the employees are subject to the rules of the firm. The fact that command and control hampers creativity and innovation leads to waste of talent and creativity of employees (Northouse, 2010, 70). This is also counterproductive in the sense that the motivation is reduced. This is because when employees are given discretion to perform duties in their own version they get motivated and novel. This can lead to innovation and invention of novel ways. Conclusion The command and control leadership style has helped in ensuring that there is consistency in the application of the regulations and rules of the organization, especially Veracity pact Ltd. In this regard, system of management of this organization has been stable. Additionally; this is attributed to the adherence to the rule of standards set by the management. The strict rules and penalties set for errant employees have helped in ensuring that organizational goals are achieved. This has also helped employees to shelf their personal goals for the sake of the overall organizational goals. Reference list Backman, M., & Butler, C. (2008). Big in Asia: 25 strategies for business success. Basingstoke, Palgrave Macmillan. Gill, R. (2010). Theory and Practice of Leadership. London, SAGE Publications Ltd. Campbell, S., & Samiec, E. (2009). 5-D leadership key dimensions for leading in the real world. Mountain View, Calif, Davies-Black Pub. European Conference on Management, Leadership and Governance, & Grant, K. (2008). ECMLG 2008: the 4th European conference on management, leadership and governance. Reading, Academic Pub. International. Dukes, E. F., Firehock, K., & Birkhoff, J. (2011). Community-based collaboration: bridging socio-ecological research and practice. Charlottesville, University of Virginia Press. United States. (2005). Command and control. [S.l.], Wildside Pr. Olson, C. A., & Singer, P. M. (2009). Winning with library leadership: enhancing services with connection, contribution, and collaboration. Chicago, American Library Association. Jewell, M. E., & Whicker, M. L. (2010). Legislative leadership in the American states. Ann Arbor, Univ. of Michigan Press. Wheatley, M. J. (2007). Finding our way leadership for an uncertain time. San Francisco, Calif, Berrett-Koehler Publishers. Perez, D. W., & Barkhurst, M. (2012). Paradoxes of leadership in police management. Clifton Park, N.Y., Delmar, Cengage Learning. Avery, G. C. (2009). Understanding leadership: paradigms and cases. London [u.a.], SAGE Fernando, M. (2007). Spiritual leadership in the entrepreneurial business a multifaith study. Cheltenham, UK, Edward Elgar. Flamholtz, E. (2006). Effective management control: theory and practice. Boston, Kluwer Academic Publishers. Baker, T. E. (2011). Effective police leadership: moving beyond management. Flushing, NY, Looseleaf Law Publications, Inc. Baril, M., & Murray, L. (2007). Board of inquiry into command, control and leadership of CANBAT 2. [Ottawa], National Defence. Saleem, S. (2010). Business envirornment. New Delhi, Pearson. Siebens, Herman. (2007). Facilitating Leadership. Garant Uitgevers N V. Northouse, P. G. (2010). Leadership: theory and practice. Thousand Oaks, Sage Publications. Read More