International Management - Essay Example

International Management The centrality of leadership is essential in managing a company or unit division holistically. Leadership styles are defined as those that provide motivation and direction in order to influence the approach and manner of influencing plans. To this end, leadership styles are classified as free reign, democratic or autocratic. By employing different leadership styles, individual productivity can be affected through his or her performance. A democratic leadership style employs inclusivity during the decision making process.

However, it is paramount to note that the leader has the final decision pertaining to a cause of action. On the other hand, an autocratic leadership style is whereby the leader mandates responsibilities to employees without asking advice from followers or employees. A leadership style that employs free reign is whereby the leader mandates the decision making process to employees as well as delegating a number of activities and tasks for them to handle. It is pertinent to note that it is commendable to employ the same leadership styles in all EU countries.

Evidently, execution of leadership styles by team members leads to both negative and positive effects to the persons concerned. Positive leaders employ the use of rewards in motivating a person. These include using education and independence as motivational reward to the citizenry. On the other hand, leaders who are negative in approach are mostly domineering and superior in nature. The moral of worker and productivity is normally adversely affected by the wrongful use of negative leadership.

To this end the EU countries consist of 27 states that are driven by economic and political motivation. Moreover, the member countries possess a myriad of norms and cultures that vary from region to region. Furthermore, the countries possess a variety of languages, religions, histories and systems of education. There equally exist divergent forms of leadership among the member countries. For example, French leaders are renowned for their autocratic style of leadership while Germans are well known or their assertive nature in leadership.

Moreover, matters and issues pertaining to human rights human relations and rights are normally divergent from one country to the other. Consequently, a solution to such differences lies in the embracing of a similar leadership style among all EU countries. However, it is pertinent to evaluate whether a single style of leadership can be accepted and effectively satisfy all member states of the EU. To this end, the efficacy and success of a single type of leadership can only be achieved through proposals and appeal for acceptance rather than forcing it down on the member states.

Moreover, in order to achieve flexible leadership type, all the European leaders need to appreciate and consider the context of these countries. The rapid rate of internationalization enhances the scope, size and types of organizations. Consequently, a rise in demand for day to day comprehension of global businesses and cross cultural awareness. The benefit of singular leadership type is that it takes advantages of improves work and employee performance. Thus, it is paramount of EU leaders to be cross culturally, sensitive, adaptive and responsive when carrying out and delegating duties all ove national borders.

The introduction of a unilateral leadership style also