Human Resource Management: Leadership and Organization - Research Paper Example

Human Resource Managements - Leadership and organization Introduction Leadership is an important component of human resource management. This is because human resource management in itself is an act of leadership, where managers have to manage (lead) their human resource to achieve common goals. Basically, human resource has been explained to be the people: in other words humans who staff and operate the affairs of an organization (Heathfield, 2011). To organize these resources well, one needs good leadership style in place so as to avoid organizational mismanagement such as organizational conflict and other forms of organizational crisis. Primarily, a leader can have great influence on the organization or management of his human resources based on the leadership style at work. There could be several leadership styles based on different leadership theories. The behavioral theory however seems to dominate the leadership styles practiced in most institutions and organizations. Under the behavioral theory, they are three leadership styles, which are autocratic leadership, democratic leadership and Laissez-faire leaders. Autocratic Leadership Autocratic leadership style has to do with that type of leadership where “leaders make decisions without consulting their teams” (Mind Tools, 2011). This means that leaders who adopt the autocratic style of leadership would be the initiators of decisions. The only role that staff and employees play here is compliance. Because the decisions are final and cooked, employees or staff members barely have a say in the instructions given. All they do is to carry out the instructions that are given out to them. Autocratic leadership may be applied in a number of circumstances in the organization to achieve results perfectly. In a typical scenario, the Mind Tools (2011) explain that “this is considered appropriate when decisions genuinely need to be taken quickly.” In the day to day running of businesses, there arise instances where the conveyance of meetings to decide on some decisions become time wasting and delay the decisions. In instances like this, leaders are justified to base on their learned and personal experiences take and get decisions implemented. A typical example of such instance is in the occasion of a disaster when lives need to be saved urgently. In such times, leaders only need to use their discretion to issue out instructions. Another situation that calls for the use of autocratic leadership is when the decision is at a top level and does not require the consent of employees or staff. An example of such case is when leaders have to decide on an incentive or motivation package for the staff. Incentives and motivation packages are mostly thought to be surprises and so are not worth deciding with the staff. Decision on the salary of workers is another example. Financial decisions such as salary allocation must be taken by leaders based on the resources, productivity level and goals of the organization rather than on the wishes and desire of workers. Democratic Leadership Democratic leadership is a more open and all-inclusive type of leadership where by leaders “allow the team to provide input before making a decision, although the degree of input can vary from leader to leader” (Mind Tools, 2011). This means that when applying democratic leadership style, general input is the order of the today. As much as possible, leaders make sure that every tom, dick and harry have a say in the decision. This way, workers become co-facilitators of decisions made in the organization rather than mere implementers of decisions. Democratic leadership may be applied at several instances in an organization. Commonly identified are decisions that involve organizational systems. In most organizations, there are systems that determine how things should be run and how the organization should operate. In deciding such systems, it is always advised that the workers and other stakeholders in whatever department the system is to work be made to be fully involved in the decision making. This is because they are always in the best position to determine what may be right for them in their company. Democratic leadership also works best when it is used in the making of rules and regulations. In order that workers and other employees do not see rules and regulations as impositions on their freedom, it is important to involve them in the making of the rules. Once all stakeholders are partakers of the making of the rules and regulations, the rules that are made bind them better because they all become signatories to them. The last instance by which democratic leadership may be used in the designation or planning of resources: commonly known as budgeting. The reason why it is important to involve all stakeholders in the designation of resources is that stakeholders in various departments of the organization always have a better understanding and knowledge of what their needs are and so are the best people to inform leadership and management of what should be allocated to them. It must be stressed that it is one thing involving stakeholders in budgetary planning and another thing deciding on the actual budgetary allocation. Most often than not, it is advised that democratic leadership be used in the planning of the budget but autocratic leadership be used in the allocation of funds. Laissez-Faire Leadership Laissez-faire leadership is the direct opposite of autocratic leadership. Laissez-faire is used to relive the leader of any direct involvement in decision making in the organization. To this end, Mind Tools (2011) explains that “Laissez-faire leaders dont interfere; they allow people within the team to make many of the decisions.” Similarly, Cherry (2011) explains that “laissez-faire leadership, also known as delegative leadership, is a type of leadership style in which leaders are hands-off and allow group members to make the decisions.” This means that instead of the leader taking the forefront, he or she delegates responsibilities to other members on the team. By stating that laissez-faire has got nothing to do with laziness but delegative mandating, we can go on to give several instances where laissez-faire may be used in a typical organizational setting. The very first instance under which laissez-faire has been identified to work best is when members on the team or in the group can be trusted on their competence (Mind Tools, 20110). This leadership style also works best when workers are highly motivated to give up their best. This means that leaders who want to employ laissez-faire really have a lot of work at hand to do because they have to ensure that they put their human resource in such a position that they can adequately take up responsibilities. One way to resuscitate workers to take up responsibilities when delegated to them is by giving them adequate training. Another instance by which laissez-faire may be used is when the leader wants to breed a new generation of leadership. In this case, a lot of responsibilities and decision making are left with the trainee in order to put him or her in a position to take after the substantive leader. Once leaders want to use this leadership style to cover their laziness, they can be assured that this approach will fail them. Conclusion It is worth concluding on a note that there is not a good or bad leadership style until a particular leadership style is practiced or applied. This is to say that applying the right leadership style at the right time constitutes an excellent leadership (Amaniampong, 2001). Leaders who apply the right leadership style at the wrong time would always have problems, organizing their human resource base because their human resource base would barely see eye in eye with them. Human resource management should be a practice that should take place in peace and harmony. Leaders must see themselves as the facilitators of this peace and harmony. Ideally, regardless of the leadership style in place, leaders must always learn to be open, goal oriented and fair when dealing with their subjects. This way, unity, sanity and above all retention within the organization can be assured. REFERENCE LIST Amaniampong, F. R. D. (2001). Types of Leaders. PrintMark Publications Limited: Toronto Cherry K (2011). What Is Laissez-Faire Leadership? Retrieved September 30, 2011 from http://psychology.about.com/od/leadership/f/laissez-faire-leadership.htm Heathfield, S. M. (2011) What is Human Resource Management? Retrieved September 30, 2011 from http://humanresources.about.com/od/glossaryh/f/what_hr.htm Jackson J and Mathis R (2011). Human Resource Management - 13th edition Cengage Learning: New York Mind Tools, (2011). Leadership Styles: Using the Right One for the Situation. Retrieved September 30, 2011 from http://www.mindtools.com/pages/article/newLDR_84.htm Read More