Management Styles and Motivational Approaches in an Organization - Essay Example

?Running head: MANAGEMENT STYLE Introduction Management styles entail the entire leadership methods adopted by managers during their day to day activities. Based on the social and cultural diversity in the work places, it is imperative for managers to employ effective techniques of managing their employees in order to ensure that the goals of an organization are attained. There exist divergent types of management styles that includes democratic, autocratic, laissez-faire, paternalistic, informal, participatory and supervisory etc. Depending on organizational setting, a particular style may do well than another. All the above management styles have been summed up by Thepot (2008) in three types of leadership in the management literature as follows: the directive leadership, the transactional leadership as well as transformational leadership. It is acceptable that different managers exhibit different styles of leadership in the course of their duty. (Efere, 2003). This paper will critically analyse different management styles and motivational approaches in an organization and their effects on performance and the effectiveness of an organization. Authoritarian style This is a style of leadership also known as coercive style of management due to its uncontrollable ways. According to this style, a manager mostly demands compliance through intimidation which is basically where only the manager has a say and his demands goes un opposed (Efere, 2003). The managers give direction without asking the opinion of his juniors and convince them on how to follow his or her requirements. According to Efere (2003), this method puts pressure on the employees which does not work well in modern business organizations as it attracts rebellion and demoralization of staff and might lead to legal redress for harassment at work place. Nevertheless, the suitability of authoritarian management style is applicable in a crises situation where a decisive measure must be taken. Democratic style A democratic manager seeks to attain his objectives through consulting his staff and coming to a compromise in decision making. When a manager involves and seeks the opinion of his or her staff on serious issues, they create a sense of responsibility and ownership among the staff who feels their contribution is valued (Efere, 2003). As depicted by Efere (2003) such management style is likely to dispel rebellion within the staff. Nonetheless, this might be problematic in instances where the staffs are against the implementation of an important plan. In spite of this, effective communication is attainable, leading to reduced rebellion within an organization where this management style is applied. Laissez-Faire Style In this type of management style which is also known as permissive style, staff gets little direction or none at all from their managers, thus being allowed to perform their duties freely. This presents to the staff a great sense of empowerment making them feel proud of being in charge of their work and confident of working without supervision (Efere, 2003). However it is very advisable that this style of management be applicable where staffs are experienced and highly proficient, interested in working unmanned, trustworthy, and independent experts sourced from outside. The potential problems with this style are: first, feedback from the staff is limited if any, thus the manager is kept in the dark in regard to what is happening in his company. Secondly, it can lead to insecurity and uncertainty within the staff members should the staff be improperly trained and inexperienced. Thirdly, a situation may arise whereby the managers withhold compliments due to the staff since they are not well acquainted with the efficiency of the staff. Lastly, the responsibilities and the role played by the manager are gradually reduced and sometimes their presence is not felt by the staff. Bureaucratic style Efere (2003) argues that Bureaucratic style is a non compromising management style where rules are followed to the letter as laid down by the establishment and so managers are exceptionally strict and there is no room for leniency if code of conduct is breached (Efere, 2003). The company policy, guidelines, code of conduct and culture dictate the running of the company and everything is done in accordance to the laid rules and regulations. This kind of management style suitably works in an establishment where routine tasks are expected of the staff, the task compels the staff to know and comprehend all the company policies and procedures, where for certain works machine operation is needed, health and safety measures require a task to be done in a certain way and Where on basis of security, routine procedures have to be executed as the day progresses (Efere, 2003). However, problems could occur out of this bureaucratic style since some jobs require initiative and innovation. In some instances, new challenges are needed to avoid staff being bored with their routine jobs and doing the same thing the same way each day. There will be staff resistance to the introduction of changes due to familiarity of doing things in certain ways in case the company changes its rules. For the company to grow there is a need to do away with bad habits formed over the years. Paternalistic There is exists a substantial disparity amongst authors in regard to the explanation and effectiveness of paternalistic tendencies in organizational management (Pellegrini and Scandura, 2008). Contrastingly and almost at the same time, while quoting Max Weber, Pellegrini and Scandura (2008) says that paternalistic ways of doing things would become extinct since organizations are becoming more bureaucratic and measures are being laid down for the protection of rights of an individual employees within an organization. Inspire of divergent views offered by various authors describing paternalistic leadership across the cultural divide, more recent studies characteristically defines paternalistic leadership as a style that brings together a disciplinarian, authoritative yet with compassionate fatherly goodwill. (Pellegrini and Scandura, 2008). This style of leadership still manifests itself and is effectively producing favourable outcome in many business establishments. Nonetheless, in western cultures and management literature, paternalistic style is considerably viewed negatively and mentioned to as benevolent dictatorship and insidiously discriminative in the work places. Paternalistic leadership is believed to rely on unquestionable obedience of the leader through personal loyalty by the staff. It is believed that a considerable amount of tension is relived off the employee since the leader takes obligation to provide protection to their subordinates (Pellegrini and Scandura, 2008) Problems of organizational design during organizational change The institutional design can be defined by its culture and composition. The attributes of an establishment are more defined by the attributes of its leadership and staff. A person responsible with implementing organizational changes can well be defined as a change leader (Thepot, 2008). During organizational change, the leadership style embraced by a change leader influences the outcome. The involvement of employees in decision making is viewed by researchers as a critical factor to mitigate resistance for a successful desired change (Thepot, 2008). Authors differ on this with others arguing that approaching change in a participatory style could be detrimental to the organizational establishment (Thepot, 2008). There are those who argue that the greater the extent of the change, the more input required of the leader. One identifiable problem of employee’s involvement in organizational change is the fact that is a lot of time is consumed. As indicated by the triangular model in dealing with changes in organizational design, the process of change, its readiness and its type dictates the success of the change. It is well assumed that an organizational leader should be a balanced assessor able to operate two different sides, behavioural and economic so as to motivate, communicate to members of the organization while rewarding on performance and in castigating of future strategies that the company will emulate (Thepot, 2008). A leader can give motivation to followers through giving purpose, meaning and guidance that gives a collective vision as well as enhancing self perception. Motivation is a channel which drives the employee’s enthusiasm to work without pressure by giving them a reasonable purpose in the task they are required to perform (Gollwitzer, 1999). Employees with job satisfaction are better performers in their given work place. In addition to good salary and wages, flexible benefits such as insurance, training, gifts and promotion among other factors are good motivators and encourage productivity as stipulated by Murphy (2009). Employee motivation approaches Employees motivation can be branched into two main larger categories; intrinsic and extrinsic motivation. Intrinsic motivation arises from within an employee. Cofer and Appley (1967) argues that intrinsic motivation is mostly obtained from personal enjoyment and experience gained from tackling a particular activity or task as directed by the managers. Intrinsic motivation may also include non-monetary aspects such as satisfaction and pride after accomplishing a complex task. Purposely non-monetary incentives seek to reward subjects or staff for work well done through opportunities that may include accommodative working hours, pleasant working conditions, training among others (Yudhvir and Sunita, 2012). On the other hand, extrinsic motivation is derived from without and comes from things and factors outside an individual. When someone is motivated to work because there is an expectation anticipated as a reward is a good example of extrinsic motivation. This includes a change in social status, salary increment, reputation and material gain (Yudhvir and Sunita, 2012). The purpose of monetary motivation according to Yudhvir and Sunita (2012) is to reward staff or workers for exceptional work performance through money. This includes sharing of profit, project bonus, grants, stocks and arranged bonuses like Christmas linked performance and paid vacations. Generally this has attracted positive motivational working condition for associates. There are two kinds of motivational theories namely traditional and modern theories. Traditional theory is viewed to work in a situation where the bigger the reward, the better the worker will accomplish and likewise the unpleasantness of the punishment. Motivational theorist believes that workers ought to be closely supervised and that they only work well where money is the driving factor (Yudhvir and Sunita, 2012). But other factors have been identified contrasting this theory; these factors are money oriented and provide high motivation for employees. Yudhvir and Sunita (2012) explained the Maslow’s need hierarchy theory consisting of five hierarchic classes showing how complex the human requirements are and continue to say that the basic requirements have to be satisfactorily met. He says that if there is any deficit in the level of human requirements, there will be a bias towards meeting this deficit. Employee motivation affects employee retention and contributes to behavioural characters within an organisational establishment. By effectively using employee retention practices an organization can learn how to use various strategies to increase organizational performance. As stipulated by Thepot (2008) it is crucial to retain critical employees stressing that having employees commit to demands of radical changes that are enlisted to bring competitiveness. Companies incur a lot loss when they lose experienced staff due to resistance to organizational changes. In this regard, Fishbein and Ajzen (1975) depicts that it is vital to retain its employees by using the right motivational influences and this requires establishing a good rapport with staff to understand what would be resourceful to them to extract long term commitment. Conclusion The success of any organization does not only depend on staff recruitment, but also in the way, mangers use their leadership styles. Depending with the organizational culture and managers should employ best styles that meet the needs of their staff as well as the objectives of their company. Every manager has a specific way of interacting, motivating and managing his staff and may incorporates more than one management styles. Effective management involves pulling together all the employees to work together as one group in order to get best performance from the workforce (Jones, 2008). It is the responsibility of managers to ensure that all employees are well compensated, able to work hard, satisfied and without stress thus high level performance. Their main resource is the employees and their goal should be to ensure they are motivated. The leader’s effectiveness is displayed in their staff motivation. They should motivate their staff by giving the better rewards and Good working environment. However the method a manager choose as a management style for their company and motivational approaches for their staff depends on situation and the type of business. The manager should be flexible to adopt different management style and avenues of motivation for any arising situation depending on the company’s rules and regulation, cultural background and the employees. Reference Cofer, N and Appley, H. 1967. Motivation: Theory and Research. London: John Wiley & Sons. Efere, P. 2003. Management Styles. London: Trans-Atlantic College. http://www.bayelsa.org.uk/pdf/bsup-management-styles.pdf Fishbein, M and Ajzen, I. 1975. Belief, attitude, intention, and behavior: An introduction to theory and research. MA: Addison-Wesley. Gollwitzer, M. 1999. Implementation intentions: Strong effects of simple plans. American Psychologist 54 (7): 493–503. Jones, I. 2008. The Human Factor: Inside the CIA's Dysfunctional Intelligence Culture: New York: Encounter Books. Murphy, J. 2009. Inner Excellence. New York: McGraw-Hill. Pellegrini, K and Scandura, A. 2008. Paternalistic Leadership: A Review and Agenda for Future Research. Journal of Management, Viewed 3rd April 2013 Thepot, J. 2008. Leadership Styles and Organization: a Formal Analysis', Revue Sciences De > Gestion, 65, pp. 287-306, Business Source Complete, EBSCOhost, viewed 2 April 2013. http://ehis.ebscohost.com/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?sid=c89d0d48-28ca-4b40-8061-c088bed0cc81%40sessionmgr114&vid=2&hid=101 Yudhvi, G and Sunita, F. 2012. Employee’s motivation: theories and perspectives. Asian Research Journals. Vol.1 Issue 2, viewed 3rd April 2013, Read More