Management of Organizational Behavior. Leadership - Essay Example

?TOPIC: LEADERSHIP DQ 4 BRIEF OVERVIEW: Situational Leadership is an extension to the contingency theory and can be defined as a leadership style without any specific rule or single pathway to follow to get the work done by the followers. However it contains an ideology to implement to influence people depending upon the readiness of the followers for the upcoming challenges. Situational leadership can be best dealt if the leader has appropriate diagnostic skills about his team or work managers. The variables which are involved in the situational activities are the Leader, followers, managers, time, and task demands. A situational leadership is comprised upon an art of observing and dealing people to make effective changes according to the behavior, situations and sensitivity of a task (Patricia Zigarmi, 2000). In short, a successful leader has to be versatile with his leadership styles and should act according to the maturity level of his team workers. HISTORICAL DEVELOPMENT: The topic of leadership is under constant growth and grooming in the organizational sciences since 1920’s and amendments or new theories are being laid continuously to bring the best of the option. Before, situational leadership by Hersey and Blanchard was introduced; different leadership theories were given like Great Man Theory, Trait Theories, Contingency Theory, Situational Theory and Behavioral Theories in which leaders were asked to follow different traits or behavior to get the tasks done (Yi-Hsuan Lee, 2007). Mouton and Blake laid a theory of behavioral leadership with a Managerial Grid, which emphasis on the concerns for people and productions can be done in different ratios which are more workable for a successful leadership. In 1970’s, Paul Hersey and Kenneth H. Blanchard introduced a new concept of leadership which was based on practical approaches within any organization. Later on different leadership styles were introduced but none fits as best as Situational Leadership by Hersey and Blanchard (Robert D. Cecil, 2006). LEADERSHIP STYLES: Leadership styles can vary from person to person but the strategy has to be carried out in the same manner. To pursue with a work command, leader have two options to consider, either task oriented behavior and relationship behavior. Task behavior could be dealt with complete guidance from when, how, where and with what to begin and relationship behavior allows followers or managers to be involved in discussions for different decisive issues. In other words, Relationship behavior offers a freedom for followers. Leaders can follow four leadership styles which were introduced by Hersey and Blanchard as guidance to act and demand according to a situation (Hersey, P. 1977). S1 (telling): Style 1 refers to the high task and low relationship behavior in which each and every task as how, when, where to be done is explained. S2 (selling): Style 2 refers to a balance of both task and relationship behavior in which followers are asked to communicate with the leader before starting any new task. S3 (participating): Style 3 refers to a low task and high relationship behavior in which followers are trusted for their endless efforts and dedication towards an organization. S4 (delegating): Style 4 refers to a low profile with both low task and low relationship behaviors in which the maturity level of the followers are completely incompatible with the work requirements and the leader has to delegate from top to bottom to get the work done. All these styles are adopted according to the maturity level of the followers. RESPONSE TO BLAKE AND MOUTON: In response to Blake and Mouton’s article “How to choose leadership style” published in February, 1982, Hersey and Blanchard appreciated the effort made by Blake and Mouton but Hersey and Blanchard responded well to this controversy by redefining that Grid talks about attitudinal dimensions and Hersey and Blanchard are more towards observed behaviors. In short, Grid interprets the values and attitudes of the followers and predicts to work with different ratios of concerns for people and production and situational leadership helps managers to make effective changes according to various behaviors of the followers (Blanchard, K.H, 1982) DIFFERENT OVERVIEWS: The phenomenon of leadership is under constant consideration of different professionals. Some contradictions or new concepts are being laid to make leaders understand a better way of dealing organizational issues with different ideologies. The main objective is to work for the attainment of the target favoring an organization, where a leader can enjoy his power and can work with different leadership styles whatever fits best to the scenario (Greenwood, 1993). In early 1970’s, Tannebaum and Schmidts proposed a new series of leadership styles based on task to relationship. According to the continuum, managers have the right to implement tasks or handover the responsibilities to his workers and to what extent should he trust his followers. Manager’s authority decreases if the freedom of followers increases. Tannebaum and Schmidts supported their series in 7 steps to boost the confidence of both team and manager over a project (Tannebaum, 1973). In short, this is supposedly the only positive approach to develop team work. Seven levels for delegating work authority are: 1. Managers decide and delegate the work to his team without any involvement of how is it done. 2. Manager decides and forwards his order with an open door to accept any concerns from his team. 3. Manager presents his decision with all facts and figures but allows team to ask valid questions or give reasonable suggestion for work procedure. 4. Manager can call upon a discussion call before taking any decisions. Team is free to demand change in the work pattern. 5. Manager asks for suggestion over a problem and then takes an action accordingly. 6. Manager delivers the outline or parameters of the project and leaves it on the team to provide work solution but manager remains accountable for the work outcomes. 7. This strategy is completely opposite to step 1. NEW MODELS Leader-Member Exchange Theory explains an ideology for managers to build work relationships with supervisors or subordinates in a unique manner. Work relationship should be build according to the designation given to an individual and firm relationships are appreciated with those who are close in decision making and have higher grade of responsibilities. These individuals are more committed and dedicated to an organization and stand hard when anything goes wrong. So they should be given a privilege of a close work relationship to make them feel special in their own way (Graen,G.B, 1995) ANALYSIS: Different theories and models of leadership styles are presented in the text above, but what works best cannot be judged completely. To avoid confusions, we can interpret the one which have a more practical approach towards better management and leadership skills. A slow and gradual development of a Situational Leadership styles have come to its perfect scheme and could be a niche of a successful organization. Hersey and Blanchard’s situational leadership is the most affective, practical and reasonable approach for an organization. However, a blend of situational leadership and LMX can do wonders. To maintain an appropriate balance between task delegation and work relationship, LMX theory can contribute positively in Situational Leadership and can result in successful outcomes. The theory presented by Tannebaum and Schmidts is not a practical approach. Freedom to followers and leaving the work authority on them does not guarantee quality work. It is possible that work is delivered on time but at the same time work quality matters. All individuals cannot be judged on a single scale, some may have a creative way of doing and some may not have that finesse to accomplish a task. To prevent future consequences, it is better to delegate a major outline and methodologies to the responsible bodies and keep a regular counter check to maintain efficiency. Moreover, involvement of many individuals with different opinions in decision making can result in personal conflicts or an unorganized work structure to follow. Thus, in this fast era, a blend of a smart theory of Situational Leadership and contemporary theory of LMX could be a perfect hit. REFERENCES: Hersey, P. and Blanchard, K. H. (1977), “Management of Organizational Behavior”: 3rd Edition– Utilizing Human Resources, Prentice Hall, New Jersey. Loren J. Naidoo, Charles A. Scherbaum, Harold W. Goldstein and George B. Graen, (2010), “A Longitudinal Examination of the Effects of LMX, Ability, and Differentiation on Team Performance” Journal of Business and Psychology, 3, 347-357. Greenwood, R,G, (1993), ‘Leadership Theory: A Historical Look at its Evolution', Journal of Leadership Studies, Nov, 1993, 3-20 Robert D. Cecil, William J. Rothwell – 2006, “Next Generation Management Development: The Complete Guide and Resource”, Wiley Publishers, pg 184.   Yi-Hsuan Lee (2007), “The relationship between situational leadership styles and job satisfaction” University of the Incarnate Word. Blanchard, Kenneth H., Patricia Zigarmi, and Drea Zigarmi, (2000), “Leadership and the One Minute Manager”, HarpercollinsBusiness. Paul. Hersey, Kenneth.H.Blanchard (1982), “Leadership Styles: Attitudes and Behaviors” Journal of Training and Development, May, 1982, 50-52. Read More