Universal Leadership Theories and Holistic Development - Essay Example

LEADERSHIP THEORIES Student’s name Code & Course Professor’s name University City Date Table of Contents Introduction 2 Background of leadership theories 3 Universal leadership theory 5 Holistic development 5 Universal leadership style definition 6 Conceptual framework 7 Values-based approach 7 Production of optimal outcomes 8 Collaborative development 9 Self-determination 9 Implications for the UAE and region 10 Conclusion 11 References 12 Introduction All cultures and organizations globally have adopted the topic of leadership as a main focus. This topic can be traced back to the genesis of civilization as evidenced by the hieroglyphics left behind by ancient Egyptians, with descriptions of ideal leadership qualities. In essence, the attributes, competences and qualities of leaders have been analyzed, debated and discussed in depth throughout the history of the civilized man. In the contemporary world, leadership still manifests itself as among the most significant topics of management with regard to practice and research (Owings & Kaplan, 2012). Just like other management topics, leadership is not equivocal; practitioners and researchers disagree on practically all aspects underlying the topic, right from definition. Leadership paradigm is categorized into integrative, contingency, behavioral and trait paradigms, the former being the most recent in the evolution of leadership theories (Day & Antonakis, 2012). These four paradigms have had significant inputs in the evolution of leadership theories, with each paradigm’s shift consequently affecting its predecessor in terms of limitations and strengths. Basically, the integrative paradigm is founded on the other three paradigms. It includes authentic, servant and transformational leadership styles through its shift from focusing on task accomplishment to focus on the leadership process (Bass & Steidlmeier, 2013). The paradigm is built upon the assumption that once the motivational needs of employees in an organization are attended to, there are corresponding better outcomes. The paradigm, despite its reliability, has proved challenging for practitioners in attaining desired superior results in organizations. The existing theories, notably in the integrative paradigm have failed in three key areas. To begin with, they do not address the requirements of follower motivation. Secondly, they take the leader to be the causation of the leadership. Finally, they do not consider the consequences, by the leader, to those being led as well as the larger society. It is therefore evident that there is need for a leadership theory that encompasses every member of the society and organizations. This paper seeks to develop a universal theory, catering for the mentioned limitations. The universal leadership style proposed herein will have seven distinct assumptions with respect to effective leadership as outlined below: i) Superior outcomes are rooted in development. ii) For development to be productive and healthy, it must be collaborative. iii) The scope of the collaboration is a function of the leadership unit. iv) The basic unit of leadership is an individual. In essence, everyone in a given organization is a leader. v) All individuals are intrinsically motivated to attain their fullest potential. vi) All individuals have the right to self-determination in the collaboration process. vii) An underlying iterative process determines self-determination. Background of leadership theories The early literature of leadership argued that leaders are preselected genetically. They also put it that the circumstances under which a leader is elicited are significant in determining individuals best suited to take up leadership positions. This led to development of trait and behavioral theories and eventually to contingency theories of leadership. All these theories attempted to provide a list of attributes that empirically validated, to be associated with effective leadership. It is from such struggles that researchers have learnt that a leader’s personality is inseparable from the leadership outcomes and dissertation. The contingency theories define leadership with regard to the leader, the situation and the followers (Gregoire & Arendt, 2014). In terms of the situation, situational theories emerged to cater for the context variable of the leader, claiming that leadership results are not necessarily embedded in traits and behaviors of a leader. The theories argue that there are countless situations under which a leader is faced with, all requiring given levels of interventions (chronic, crisis and acute levels). The main problem with situational leadership was that the situations do not occur in isolations, which calls for complex assemblages of context. This challenge led to the shift of leadership from performance to interaction. At this point, leadership theories had grown, on a collective basis, to integrative theories. The impact was to develop a personal touch with employees in such theories as transformational, servant and authentic leadership styles. Transformational leadership is distinguished by its consideration for individuals, intellectual stimulation, inspirational motivation and idealized influence (Roueche et.al, 2014). Servant leadership promotes equity of all participants in an organization by avoiding dominance of control and supervision, and instead inclining to employee empowerment. Authentic leadership highlights a leader’s attributes and their purposes for leadership with regard to self-discipline, interconnectedness, compassion, integrity and self-awareness. Universal leadership theory Leadership projects beyond the scope of leaders and the led. This is because the concept of leadership is integrative with respect to leaders, their followers and the prevailing situations, hence there should not exist the prejudice of focusing on the leader alone. Leadership relationships postulate emotive forces and hence influence by a leader. Charismatic leaders are products of such emotive forces (transformational leaders) (Barroso et.al, 2013). Even in these kinds of leaders, the problem of focusing on the leader is still evident. As the leader becomes the central focus, charisma becomes just a routine in an organization. This routinization cuts the connection between the leader and their followers as well as converting that connection to an organizational or institutionally owned property. The universal leadership theory argues that the solution is underpinned by coming up with a unit of analysis different from the leader, the led, the situation and leader-follower relationships- this is the holistic development system. Holistic development Holistic development is fundamentally concerned with systems, while identifying the person-in-environment as the basic units of the system. The underlying sociocultural, psychosocial and biophysical dimensions define the person-environment interface. Features of a holistic system include requirement for coordination and synchronization, reflection of change during transformation, adaptation process and interaction. In this respect, the leader, the follower and the situation do not compete for control positions; instead, they display continuous and interconnected adaptations, transformations, synchronizations and coordination. Additionally, wholeness and coherence are significant in attaining meaningfulness in this theory. This meaningfulness, in holistic development has four main quadrants. These are serving others, expressing full potential, unity with others as well as developing and becoming self. In essence, leaders can use their formal positions to extend values to their followers, who internalize such values from self-conceptualization (Renzulli & D’Souza, 2014). Such internalizations motivate the followers to achieve idealized visions from connecting to the leader. In holistic development, leadership is not the source nor the manager of meaning for significant others. Leadership is only an instrument for promotion of self-defined meaningfulness by an individual so long as such definitions are strategic to the broader organizational goals and objectives. Intentional focus and person-in-context create development and performance frameworks, creating four growth domains namely development, self-reflection, performance and reasoning (Estampe et.al, 2013). Holistic developments results to self-directed participants. The environments created have impact in metacognitive development which in turn helps in sustaining autonomous and constructive decision-making. Leaders also gain the capacity to direct all the participants in respecting and appreciating the autonomy given to them. The work environment is also boosted by the collectiveness employed in holistic development. it also creates learning organizations where the participants are in a continuum of nurturing their results to desired levels, new and extensive thinking patterns are promoted, they are exposed to free collective aspirations and ways of learning as a team (Kolb, 2014). Universal leadership style definition The combination of other theories with the universal leadership theories have, as outlined herein, resulted to formation of learning organizations. The theory seeks to develop a unified focus to leadership. As such, this paper defines universal leadership as the values-based method of creating ideal results by collaboratively developing the participants throughout functional performance. It is also a systematic development-oriented approach influencing leaders, followers and the environment in a continuum of individual, team and organizational transformations (Van Wart, 2013). It is an integrated leadership method with fundamental components of nurturing, collaboration, power sharing, thought leadership, results orientation, strategic action, visionary, stewardship, inquiry, reflection, personal mastery and organizational teaching and learning. The leadership style also focuses on the body, mind and soul hence attending to the psycho-spiritual perspective of personal wellbeing. In this style, a people-centered approach is displayed, with an orientation to outcomes and processes. There is responsibility sharing in all levels of the organization which results to superior outcomes. Correspondingly, the leadership produces a self-reinforcing and interactive community in the organization as opposed to bureaucratic methods. Conceptual framework Values-based approach Leadership ethics are the closest existing definition for values-based approach. Values-based and servant leadership styles have been linked directly with moral and ethics orientations which represent values. Defining a value can, however, prove that there are many definitions of values-based concept in leadership. A value can be defined as the judgments, standards and principles deemed important by an individual. It is inarguably true that such standards, at a personal level may not exist in correlation to those of others in a given organization. Definition for values-based therefore must not be ambiguous. In this context, it gives equivalent focus on individual, organizational and community welfare (Gariga & Mele, 2013). This section of universal leadership creates a correlation between the universal leadership and steward leadership styles. Steward leadership gives employees the powers to make autonomous decisions with full job control. This definition can fit as well as a definition for values-based approach; it is ambiguous in bringing out the part played by stewardship in outcomes facilitation. Stewardship should therefore be defined as entrusting human beings to use resources wisely while developing and conserving them. A combination of all these definitions of values-based leadership dictates that the universal leadership styles is obliged to conserve the economic and human organizational resources and at the same time promote self-determination and growth as individual and collective functions. Production of optimal outcomes Practical utility requires that a leadership style address the subject of performance outcomes. In essence, every leadership style attempts to drive behaviors towards the achievement of particular objectives (Barna, 2013). The universal leadership style promotes the achievement of such objectives to postulate the most desired outcomes with respect to leadership units (individual, group or organization). Currently, transformational leadership is being employed in most organizations globally; it has gained empirical endorsement with regard to leadership effectiveness, job performance, organizational change commitments well as team learning and effectiveness (Barna, 2013). Universal leadership has its core elements presented in these attributes of transformational leadership (. For instance, the team-based concept of the universal leadership style ensures production of optimal outcomes by utilization of the collective strengths from the term members and simultaneously spreads their weaknesses for absorption and compensation by team members. Collaborative development Collaboration is created when individuals with a common goal are brought together. It is only through member efforts that organizations are able to achieve their goals and objectives. Other styles such as transformational leadership claim that their success comes from encouraging their employees to be strategic in their own goals such that they are aligned to organizational goals (Burke & Noumair, 2015). This is done through idealized influence and inspirational vision. Universal leadership surpasses these other styles in that it uses professional and personal development of participants to achieve such objectives. Transformational leadership focuses on the charisma of the leader; the universal leadership style focuses on the continuous relationship between the organization and its participants. It is therefore easier, in the universal style in comparison to the transformational style, for an employee to align his/her goals with that of the organization. In essence, the participants are not required to align their achievements to those of the leader first, notably idealized influences and inspirational visions, but they link their goals directly to those of the organization. Self-determination It is only through self-determination that an employee can assess their impact towards achieving organizational objectives, develop self-efficacy and find meaning of their work (Gordon, 2015). The universal leadership style enables employee to achieve such virtues by offering them the right to exercise self-determination by placing all of them in the leadership process. Implications for the UAE and region Any business requires a leadership style that has meaningful impact in creation of a motivational environment at work. In the Middle East, more than 85% of successful leaders are flexible in their leadership styles such that they take different measures with different situations (Ajenaibi, 2015). It is disheartening that, in the region, an estimated 62% of organizational leaders, instead of creating enabling environments for their employees, they are demotivating them by use of leadership styles such as coercion and authoritative approaches (AlMazrouei & Zacca, 2015). A study by the Hay Group involving about 500 leaders indicates that leaders in the region are not displaying the best outcomes from their leadership styles. Only about 16% of the leaders in the region have created high performance climates for their employees while the rest are demotivating those they manage. The dominant leadership styles in the region are control and command leadership, which are currently being used in more than 70% of organizations in the region (Suliman & Hayat, 2014). There is therefore a great misalignment between the universal leadership style with those being used in the Middle East, notably UAE. There is a minimal chance to attain the desired achievements and superior results by use of leadership styles that are focused only on performance while leaving out the process. The process carries the needs and requirements of the employees in achieving their own objectives in line with those of an organization. It is time for the region to adopt this leadership style. In the contemporary world, it is unethical to coerce people to do their work or employ any stressing techniques in leadership (Child, 2015). The universal leadership style is a combination of all other existing styles of leadership. This means that in leading others, the leadership and the leader cannot be the points of focus. The concepts of holistic development, values-based approaches, production of optimal outcomes and collaborative development can only be achieved by employing a relevant leadership style. This should be done in the Middle East, by allowing employees to exercise self-determination. Conclusion All theories are subject to empirical validation for them to be fully applicable. As opposed to other leadership styles such as transformational leadership, which have empirical endorsements, this theory and leadership style has not been tested and hence not empirically validated. It is however applicable in assessing organizational climates and individual readiness to take up to practices that promote establishment of learning organizations with participants who are strategically empowered. This leadership style collects the best products of integrative leadership class as well as holistic development and uses them to create a unified framework that provides room for further research and refining. Businesses and organizations that value superior performances have high chances of attaining such performances upon adoption of this model. This is the model that encourages inventions and innovations in the currently competitive global markets. Businesses left behind in terms of leadership are subsequently left behind in all other aspects. It is therefore valid to argue that leadership is at the core of business success or failure. Modernity, sustainability and globalization call for a more unifying leadership style that does not focus on leaders, followers or prevailing situations and circumstances. It is time to focus on the basic units of leadership-the individual, the organization and the community. References Al-Jenaibi, B. (2015). Current issues about public relations professionals: challenges and potentials of PR in UAE organisations. Middle East Journal of Management, 2(4), 330-351. AlMazrouei, H., & Zacca, R. (2015). Expatriate leadership competencies and performance: a qualitative study. International Journal of Organizational Analysis, 23(3), 404-424. Avolio, B. J., Walumbwa, F. O., & Weber, T. J. (2012). Leadership: Current theories, research, and future directions. Annual review of psychology, 60, 421-449. Barna, G. (2013). The power of team leadership: Achieving success through shared responsibility. Waterbrook Press. Barroso Castro, C., Villegas Perinan, M. M., & Casillas Bueno, J. C. (2013). Transformational leadership and followers' attitudes: The mediating role of psychological empowerment. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 19(10), 1842-1863. doi:10.1080/09585190802324601. Bass, B. M., & Steidlmeier, P. (2013). Ethics, character, and authentic transformational leadership behavior. The leadership quarterly, 10(2), 181-217. Burke, W. W., & Noumair, D. A. (2015). Organization development: A process of learning and changing. Pearson Education. Child, J. (2015). Organization: contemporary principles and practice. John Wiley & Sons. Day, D. V., & Antonakis, J. (2012). Leadership: Past, present, and future. The nature of leadership, 3-25. Estampe, D., Lamouri, S., Paris, J. L., & Brahim-Djelloul, S. (2013). A framework for analysing supply chain performance evaluation models. International Journal of Production Economics, 142(2), 247-258. Garriga, E., & Melé, D. (2013). Corporate social responsibility theories: Mapping the territory. In Citation Classics from the Journal of Business Ethics (pp. 69-96). Springer Netherlands. Gordon, D. C. (2015). Self-determination and History in the Third World. Princeton University Press. Gregoire, M. B., & Arendt, S. W. (2014). Leadership: Reflections over the past 100 years. Journal of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics, 114(5), S10-S19. Kolb, D. A. (2014). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and development. Pearson Education. Owings, W. A., & Kaplan, L. S. (2012). Leadership and organizational behavior in education: Theory into practice. Pearson Higher Ed. Renzulli, J. S., & D’Souza, S. (2014). Intelligences outside the normal curve: Co-cognitive factors that contribute to the creation of social capital and leadership skills in young people. Critical issues and practices in gifted education: What the research says, 343-361. Suliman, A. M., & Hayat, R. (2014). 4. Leadership in the UAE. Leadership Development in the Middle East, 104. Van Wart, M. (2013). Administrative leadership theory: A reassessment after 10 years. Public Administration, 91(3), 521-543. Read More