How Important Leadership Style is for the Success of John Lewis - Coursework Example

John Lewis Partnership John Lewis Partnership John Lewis Partnership plc, is mostly known as John Lewis. In the year 1995, the company had 23 department stores, 41,100 partners, 112 Waitrose Supermarkets, pre-tax profits of GBP 150 million, and a turnover amounting to GBP 2.8 billion. John Lewis, being a public limited company, is apparently owned by its employees as a group. The employees are referred to as partners in this collective ownership. The management is supposed to run the activities of the enterprise with the interests of the partners, whether in the past, the present or the future, in their minds. John Lewis PLC is a good employer. It takes good care of the employees who are still the partners by ensuring that they are well motivated and contented, therefore, giving friendly and helpful service. Each year, the employees receive a share of profits paid out to them as cash bonus. The public limited company is large competitive, and it aims at providing value for money and good service (Northouse, 2013). In the application of the company’s slogan that says ‘never knowingly undersold’, it reaches the point where the partners are given a small reward after pointing out that a competitor is charging less than John Lewis. It seems that John Lewis partnership avails good conditions of reward for partners and employment and avail quality goods to its customers with excellent service at competitive prices. The company has been successful and as a result it expands successfully (Shenk, 2014). The company operates a profit-sharing scheme that seems to be well combined with the form of open management it uses. This paper will look at its profitability, at the degree to which its partners are served and at the company’s way of managing. In John Lewis Partnership PLC, the central board comprises of the chairman, the deputy chairman, five directors who are appointed by the chairman, and five directors whose nomination is done every year by the central council. This leads to a central council of twelve directors. Normally, a chairman is supposed to be elected by the fellow directors and from the group of directors. To the contrary, here, the previous chairman appoints the chairman (Cathcart, 2014). It is normal that the chairman has much power and is accorded the position of authority. There seem to be some disagreements with the central board regarding his views. Under the constitution of the company, the nominees of the central council are entitled to require consultation of the board to the council in any of the three sets of circumstances, if the wish is from a minimum of three. These circumstances include redundancy that involves more than 12 partners, contraction of the business through liquidation of fixed assets exceeding five per cent of the total assets, or expansion of the business of the company by more than five percent of its capital instead of using the accumulation of profits (Paranque and Willmott, 2014). In the partnership, the appointment of the chairman is done by the previous chairman. He will in turn appoint the partnership’s next chairman. The chairman makes the appointment of five directors into the central board and also up to 20 percent of the members of the central board, normally from senior management. The chairman also appoints the senior executives of the partnership. The removal of the chairman by the central council can take place if 84 percent of the elected members, which may translate to 67 per cent of the central council members, want his replacement to be done. It is not likely that there could be the agreement of such majorities under any circumstances but the extreme ones, and this may be the intention of this provision (Glancey, 2014). This confirms what was said earlier that the position is accorded much power and has much authority. Control and ownership of the Partnership, and thus the holding company of John Lewis Partnership PLC are under the trust of John Lewis Partnership Trust Limited. For the Trust Company, both the chairman and the deputy chairman should be appointed as the Chairman and as the deputy chairman of the central board. In the Trust Company, the chairman is in complete control of all the voting shares. This implies that the chairman is the only person in the Trust Company who can vote. The only exception arises when the central council decides to replace him using the specified big majority (Pruett, 2013). It, therefore, appears that the control and ownership are in the power of the chairman as a single person as the Trustee. The partnership produces The Gazette (a national magazine) and Chronicles (local magazines), and allows anyone to write to the national or local magazines produced by the group, anonymously or signing the letter. The management orders that all the anonymous letters should be published. The only exemption is if the publication could lead to harming the organization. As an effective way of calling for the accountability of the management, there is rigorous protection of rigorous anonymity. The constitution allows the staff to write to the management and complain totally anonymously in the in-house newspaper’s columns about the management. While anonymity is guaranteed, the reply of the letters must be given in an honest manner (Mkulu and Nam, 2013). There may be an unskilled worker in the store who writes a letter that is awkward to the chairman. The chairman is required to reply to the letter honestly. It is in this simple provision where the employees of the group are given the effective control and influence over the partnership’s style of management. A good manager is perceived to be ready for helpful criticism, regardless of its origin. It turns out that most of the managers don’t like criticism. This has been a feature of the authoritarian managers of organizations who fail in their operations (Pfajfar, Uhan, Redek, and Fank, 2013). The element that is important in the effective management is inspiring the staff, motivating them towards working well and also working well together in groups. This, therefore, implies that public criticism may be viewed as a sign of how a manager is inadequate in this aspect of the work and others. The managers at all levels carry careful examination of the magazines of the group to see what and who is mentioned. The examination will also examine the honest replies that are required to be given. The public criticism towards any factor of the manager’s work has the possibility of affecting the prospects of ob and promotion. Public praise may bear the same consequences. Criticism that is from within the group of an individual, from below, can be discredited, eliminated, or stifled. However, public criticism is difficult to deal with it in this way (Cosper, 2013). The right of the employee to air the criticism anonymously in public any factor of management in the manner that can be viewed by all is one of the most probable motivation towards management that is good and effective at all levels. This underlies the success of the partnership in good measure. From the success story of John Lewis, there are ten elements that are subject to consideration in studying the leadership style. The first element is that the strategy of John Lewis is founded on three simple objectives. They include customers, partners, and profits. The core values of John Lewis Company are in everyone’s understanding, and it is viewed as a philosophy that can be bought by the employees. The second element is that it hires inspirational leaders (Glancey, 2014). The company brags about the inspirational leaders that it has, with the inclusion of the highly regarded chairman Mr. Charlie Mayfield and the managing director Mr. Andy Street, who hold passionate talks about their beliefs and objectives (Perumal, 2013). There is also the inclusion of women in the board, a feature which is rare in many businesses. The third element is that there is the culture of democracy. The employees of John Lewis are given the privilege of giving their opinions regarding how the business will be run, apart from receiving a share of profits. The company holds frequent staff council staff meetings in the efforts of collecting grievances and ideas. The weekly magazine produced by the company gives the staff the chance to air their opinions regarding management and policies. The fourth aspect is the tendency of the company to offer employee perks (Cosper, 2013). The partners of the company get many staff perks and benefits that range from access to sports clubs and holiday homes to discounts on theme park admission fees and theater tickets. The staff is also encouraged to put on concerts, plays, and exhibitions. The company’s reward manager for benefits, Rachael Abbott told Employee Benefits that the staff perks is one section of the company’s total reward preposition. She asserts that it is the reason why people are interested o work with the company and when they join they stay for a long time. The fifth aspect is having a management style that is relaxed. The employees of John Lewis prosper because they are not supervised closely. The employees are given the clear guidelines, and the management trusts them to carry on with the job instead of being closely watched (Rowe and Guerrerro, 2013). The staff empowerment is the sixth aspect to consider. Similarly, the employees are encouraged to show enterprise and think for themselves. This makes them have the sense of responsibility. They are also encouraged to work as a team to get solutions to the problems. John Lewis partnership focuses on staff management. This makes it the seventh aspect. As Chairman Charlie Mayfield asserts, what matters the most at John Lewis is happiness of the people they serve. To the contrary, Perumal (2013) argues that this approach is not adopted by many companies whose main objective is profit maximization rather than giving the staff the feeling of being valued. The aim of John Lewis is ensuring that there is the probability of fulfillment in every position. The eighth element involves encouraging personal development. All the partners at John Lewis are offered the chance to learn and develop. Performance reviews are carried out annually. Bibliography: Cathcart, A. (2014). Paradoxes of participation: non-union workplace partnership in John Lewis. The International Journal of Human Resource Management. 25, 762-780 Cosper, S. C. (2013). Principal leadership styles and teacher commitment, collaboration, certainty, learning, and shared goals. Ed. D.--Lincoln Memorial University, 2013. Glancey, J. (2014). A Very British Revolution: 150 Years of John Lewis. London, Laurence King Publishing. Northouse, P. G. (2013). Leadership: theory and practice. Thousand Oaks, SAGE. Mkulu SR., D., and Nam, P. (2013). Perceptions On Principals Leadership Styles. Saarbrücken, LAP LAMBERT Academic Publishing. Paranque, B., and Willmott, H. (2014). Cooperatives--saviours or gravediggers of capitalism? Critical performativity and the John Lewis Partnership. Organization. 21, 604-625. Pruett, M. M. (2013). Instructional coaching leadership styles and practices. Thesis (Ed. D.)--Oklahoma State University, 2013. Pfajfar, G., Uhan, M., Redek, T., and Fang, T. (2013). Slovenian Business culture: how proverbs describe leadership styles. Book of Proceedings. 62-64. Perumal, R. (2013). Leadership Styles in an Organisation. Saarbrücken, LAP LAMBERT Academic Publishing. Rowe, W. G., and Guerrero, L. (2013). Cases in leadership. Thousand Oaks, Calif, SAGE Publications. Shenk, J. W. (2014). Powers of two: finding the essence of innovation in creative pairs. London, John Murray. Read More