Managing at the Edge - Research Paper Example

This is an approach that underestimates the abilities of the employees to carry out tasks and to innovate and improvise as they go. In this kind of companies, each and every decision has to be taken at top level and the employees in the lower levels of hierarchy only have to mechanically obey what they are told. There will a fixed chain of command that will often be lengthy as well (Carney and Getz, 2009, p.23). The decision making will be highly “procedure-driven” (Carney and Getz, 2009, p.23). Lack of flexibility caused by stringent rules and stunning of the possibilities of creative contribution from employees, are two major drawbacks of 'how' companies.

In contrast to this, a 'why' company is one which shares with its employees a single quest, namely, 'why we are doing what we are doing?' (Carney and Getz, 2009, p.16). Naturally, it is a common quest for the company and the employees. The only answer possible for this question is, “ to keep the customers happy” (Carney and Getz, 2009, p.17). Thus the 'why' company wants the employees to keep its customers happy and does not bother much about how it is attained (Carney and Getz, 2009, p.17-18).

This is an approach that allows maximum contribution and participation from the employees. It gives freedom to the employees to innovate and improvise and through that, will enhance their motivation and self-esteem. In traditional 'how' companies, the strict control can help achieve good growth and profits (Carney and Getz, 2009, p.43). But this positive aspect will be counter-balanced by the detachment and stress that the employees feel in an environment where there is least freedom (Carney and Getz, 2009, p.43). This will get reflected in their output as well (Carney and Getz, 2009, p.43). References Carney, B.M. And Getz, I. (2009) Freedom, Inc.

, New York: Crown Business. 2. What are the characteristics of a Level 5 Leader? Level 5 leader is someone who has the capability to lead a company from “good to great”, according to Collins (2001). The term, level 5, is used to indicate “a five-level hierarchy” (Collins, 2001). Collins (2001) has explained these five levels as given below: Level 1 relates to individual capability, Level 2 to team skills, Level 3 to managerial competence, and Level 4 to leadership as traditionally conceived.

Level 5 leaders possess the skills of levels 1 to 4 but also have an "extra dimension": a paradoxical blend of personal humility ("I never stopped trying to become qualified for the job") and professional will ("sell the mills"). People who inhabit the level 5 leadership category are not egocentric and dislike showing off (Collins, 2001). All the same, they have the strength and will power to take bold decisions when the hour needs so (Collins, 2001). It is the goals, the organization and the meaningfulness of the whole exercise that come first for them rather than their personal ego (Collins, 2001).

They are highly ambitious but not in the real sense the word, ambition is commonly used (Collins, 2001). Level 5 leaders are ambitious not towards their own narrow personal career goals but for greatness of the job involved and the organization (Collins, 2001). Level 5 leader will always be only partially satisfied by the results achieved and would constantly seek self-improvement (Collins, 2001). The greatest motivation of such a leader is to leave behind a real