Different Types of Leadership Styles - Case Study Example

Name: Professor: Institution: Course: Date: Introduction People confuse management with leadership since managers and leaders have much in common. However, they have some immense differences between the two. In contrast to the notion of 'management,' which suggests maintenance or preservation, 'leadership' implies a process directed at shipping the behaviour of others. It is the act of inspiring subordinates to perform their duties willingly, competently and enthusiastically. A leader influences his followers and their behaviour in whatever direction he or her chooses. Effective leadership is the ability to successfully maximize and integrate available resource within the external and internal environment from the attainment of organizational goals, transforms potential into reality, triggers the power of motivation in people and guides them towards goals (Tannenbaum, & Schmidt, 2002). This essay will focus on different types of leadership styles and identity which one’s John Terrill used in the case study. We will also focus on leadership approach that one can take in this situation and why. Leadership styles Leadership style is the approach and manner of providing direction, motivating subordinates and implementing plans. Lewin (2001) lead a group of researchers to identify different style of leadership. The three major styles of leadership, namely: Authoritarian or autocratic, Participative or democratic, and Delegative or Free Reign. In the autocratic style, all authority and decision making is centre in the leader. The leader makes all decisions and exercise total control by use of reward and punishment. An autocratic leader requires conformity from subordinates and considers his decision to be superior. They tell their subordinates what they want done and how it should be accomplished, without getting the advice from them.. One may tend to think that this style as a way for yelling, leading by threats and abusing power and using demeaning language. In urgent circumstances, people prefer to be told what to do next. According to Zine, “In fact, in times of stress or emergency, some subordinates may actually prefer an autocratic style; they prefer to be told exactly what to do. In many working environment, length debates has no place and this style of leadership limits arguments. It allows subordinates to have one task which is to work resulting to subordinates mastering their duties and becoming proficient enough to help grow the organization. However, the communication style of an autocratic leader is viewed as one way. They tell their subordinates exactly what they want done. This can be very frustrating if the ‘boss’ talks with subordinates only when they make mistakes and a end of the day little praise is provided. Moreover, it can generate an organization of zombies with on fresh ideas. In addition, autocratic style can create an environment of resentment and fear, leading to absenteeism and high turnover which can hider progress. Also, it may stifle creative ideas that can make the organization more competitive (Thaker 2009). Democratic style seeks to obtain corporation from workers by allowing them participating in decision making. Adopting this style is not a sign of weakness; rather it’s a sign of strength that your subordinates will respect. Democratic style is mostly used when a leader has part of information, and his subordinates have other part. The tension between the leader and the subordinates (team members) is reduces as a result of reduces denial and fear of rejection which will make all sorts of issues addressable. On the other hand, the leader would have certain expectations and demands from his employees which make them fear the leader. A positive work environment is created since a culture of junior workers getting a fair amount of responsibility and challenges is encouraged. “Two minds are better than one!” same applies here. Also, when creative ideas are put together, great benefits are reaped. Organizations run with this motive that each and every person has some characteristics that can fulfill the object of the company (Thaker 2009). In addition, this style reduces employee turnover ratio since a democratic leader makes subordinates feel empowered at the work place as it is essentially performance based and also, many of the workers appreciate this style of management as it secures them a safe future with the organization. Moreover, democratic style of leadership can reduce office politics which threatens the growth and development of a working environment. All the people in the organization use their skill together to complete a task and hence all ideas are taken into consideration and carefully debated. However, some leaders adopt democratic leadership style to please their employees but fail to follow the technique in its entirety which might simply take in all the ideas and end up never implementing them (Thaker 2009). Decision making process is slower compared to the autocratic styles. Also, there is lack of responsibility since tasks are undertaken by a team and not an individual hence no one can volunteer to take responsibilities when things go wrong. Finally, the style is very expensive in terms of time and resources. This style does not depend on the leader to provide external motivation but the workers motivation themselves based on their needs, wants and desires. Subordinates are given goals and left on their own to achieve them. It increases the worker independence (Schriesheim, 2000). The style is not used so that you can blame others when thing go wrong, rather it is used when you fully trust and confidence in the people below you. This style leaves the manager with more time to deal with more important issues. Also, it leads to employee development and it’s less costly since it requires less supervision. However, free reign leadership style may lead to lack of direction since every one do tasks their own way. Lack of communication for manager may lead to confusion in the work place. Other leadership styles include charismatic and transformation styles (Thaker 2009). A charismatic leader has a high enthusiasm and a motivator of subordinates; he infects others with energy and belief. This type of leader delegates responsibilities and spends more time communicating (Thaker 2009). From the case study, John Terrill has used Democratic leadership style to influences the 20 engineers in the technical service department. He seeks to obtain corporation from the workers by allowing them participating in decision making. From case study we are told “Terrill called a meeting of engineers, this shows that Terrill has part of information and his subordinates have other part on what is affecting the department. He is coming together with the engineers to discuss the challenges affecting the department and also how they are going to overcome the changes. However, it’s important to note that Terrill have certain expectations and demands from his employees which make them fear the leader, this is note from the case study when Terrill issued an order effective immediately that the originals be turned in daily to his office rather than mailed to headquarters which was followed by the engineers. Leadership approach There are three major leadership approaches, namely: leadership traits approach, Behavioural approach to leadership and contingency approach. These approaches have been grounded on leadership theories. As a manager of technical service division of DGL International I can use contingency leadership approach to overcome the challenges facing the department. The goal of contingency approach is to identify the situation variable managers need to consider in assessing how different forms of leadership will be received. There are three models of contingency approach which includes; least preferred co-worker model, path-goal model and participation model (Fiedler, Fred 1999). According to least preferred co-worker model, leaders become leaders not only because of their personality but because of various situational factors that they face. The approach has identified three critical dimensions of leadership situation that affects a leader style, these dimensions include; position power, pas structure and leader- member relationship (Fiedler, Fred 1999). From this dimensions, leaders are expected to be task oriented and work oriented. According to Path-goal model, the purpose of leadership in an organization is to clarify to subordinates the path to desired goals. The subordinates and the environmental characteristics determine the way in which a manager is going to act. The subordinates characteristic include; ability, skills, perception, attitude and ambitions. Environmental characteristics include: nature of work, event to which jobs are structured and authority system within an organisation. The model suggest that the leader needs to use common sense and it assumes that the leadership is flexible i.e. it can change according to the needs. Finally, participation model addresses the question of how much subordinates should be allowed to participate in decision making. It identifies five degrees of participation (Fiedler, Fred 1999). Autocratic i In this degree, the manager makes the decision alone without the subordinates Autocratic ii The manager asks subordinates for information that he or she needs to make the decision but still makes decision alone Consultative i The manager share the situation with selected subordinates and asks for information and advice. The manager still makes the decision alone but keeps subordinate actively involved Consultative ii The manager meets the subordinates as a group to discuss the situation. Information is freely share although the manager still makes the decision alone Group ii The manager and subordinates meet as a group and share information and the entire group makes the decision (Fiedler, Fred 1999) From the above analysis, contingency leadership approach is the best since if flexible and involves subordinates in making decision. Quality and acceptable decisions are made because of the amount of relevant information that is possessed by both the manager and the subordinates. In addition, it’s evident that John Terrill has used Democratic leadership style to influences the 20 engineers in the technical service department. This leadership style will be more effective when he adopts Contingency Approach of leadership. Reference Fiedler, Fred (1999) a theory of leadership effectiveness: New York McGraw-Hill Lewin, K., LIippit, R. and White, R. K (2009) Patterns of aggressive behavior in experimentally created social climates. Journal of Social Psychology, 10, 271-301 Thaker S (2009) Types of leadership styles, Retrieved on 19th May 2011 from http://www.scribd.com/doc/6327744/Types-of-Leadership-Styles Tannenbaum, R. & Schmidt, W (2002) How to choose a leadership pattern: Harvard Business Review, No. 73311 (originally published in March-April 2000 issue). Schriesheim, C A (2000) The Great High Consideration: High Initiating Structure Leadership Myth: Evidence on its Generalizability. The Journal of Social Psychology Fiedler, Fred (1999) a theory of leadership effectiveness: New York McGraw-Hill Read More