Leadership Style Evaluation - Term Paper Example

? Leadership of the of the Every company/business is driven by its own sets of goals, standards and mission-influenced activities. In order to achieve those goals and meet the standards, teams have been witnessed to perform differently, from being highly effective to absolutely poor. Their performance cannot be attributed to any single factor but rather a combination of factors, one of them being the quality of coordination and interpersonal relationship between teams and their leaders. The vision of leaders, in today’s world, takes different forms which serve to streamline and dedicate team efforts into achieving a commonality in work standards. An effective leadership is reflected in terms of the leader’s behavior, tactics, strategies, and adaptability to situations. However, in the modern day world, corporations have witnessed a drastic change in the model of leadership where no such model can be regarded perfectly right or absolutely wrong. Their implementation has become leader specific. The change in leadership style has been reflected in terms of the leader’s vision, planning, and effective application of resources in order to ensure a smooth and friendly operating environment whereby high level of productivity and personnel satisfaction can be achieved. As such this report will focus on different theories of leadership and will evaluate the leadership style of three leaders, Brain, Larry and Tom, who work for Kay and Associates Inc, based on the leadership theories studied within the report. Table of Contents Introduction 4 Leadership Theories 5 Leadership Grid 5 Path Goal Theory 7 Fiedler’s contingency model 8 Leadership Style Evaluation 9 Brain 9 Larry 10 Tom 12 Conclusion 13 References 14 Introduction Kay and Associates, Inc. (KAI) is a small business that was established in 1960 providing cost effective and exceptional quality technical services to Government and Commercial customers worldwide. Their operations for the last 50 years have got worldwide recognition and thus they are always expected to provide the very best of their services to their customers from all over the world. KAI's line of operations involve management of complex depot level aviation maintenance operations, metrology laboratory operations, maintenance test flight, flight training, management and operation of customer owned ground support equipment and direct maintenance and support for daily flight operations Currently KAI holds the contract to maintain aviation Contract Field Team (CFT) on HAAF, GA, for the US government providing all levels of maintenance, including Organizational, Intermediate and Depot level support (Kay and Associates Inc, 2010). The CFT for this department is composed of three subsequent teams along with few support personnel. The first two team’s line of work involves Chinook helicopters and comprises of 13 members, and is headed by Brian and Larry. Whereas the third team, comprising of 9 people, is led by Tom and they work on black hawk helicopters. This report will involve a thorough analysis of leadership theories such as the leadership grid, path – goal theory and Fiedler’s contingency model thereby evaluating the performance of each of the leaders mentioned above. Leadership Theories Leadership Grid Leadership can be defined as a process which initiates, enables, develops implements and maintains a change in the management of an individual, group or an organization (Mackenzie, 2006). In this rapidly changing environment the role of leaders rather than managers has become a critical factor contributing towards the performance of an organization (Cope & Wadell, 2001). A similar theory has been explained by Natale, Sora & Kavalipurapu (2004). According to Zeidan (2009), some leaders are task oriented (whose leadership is based on setting and enforcing tight schedules) whereas some are people oriented (whose leadership is based on accommodating employee needs). The important thing here is to identify one’s leadership tendencies and to work on developing the skills which are missing. Zeidan (2009) explained the popular framework developed by Robert Blake and Jane Mouton called the Managerial/Leadership Grid which helps a leader to think about his leadership tendencies. The following figure depicts the Black Mouton managerial grid: Fig: 1 Black Mouton managerial Grid (Source: Zeidan, 2009, p. 84) The grid portrays five positions which represent five different managerial behavior patterns: Impoverished style: A lazy approach followed by managers showing low concern for both production and people. The manager does not want to be blamed for any mistakes and sole aim of the individual is to preserve job and job seniority thereby avoiding getting into any sorts of trouble. Country Club Style: This style depicts more concern towards people than production. The leadership tendency is to pay attention to the comfort and needs of employees with a view that this will increase performance. The leader is redundant in using legitimate powers scaring that this would jeopardize the employee – leader relationship. This approach will give rise to a friendly work environment but will render the organization highly non productive. Produce/Perish Style: Unlike the Country club style, this approach is adopted by authoritarian or compliance leader. Leadership tendency involves a high concern for production rather than people. Payment is made in return for performance. There is no space for collaboration or cooperation. Company goals are given top priority thereby pressurizing employees through rules and punishments. This type of approach might render the organization productive but results in high labor turnover. The Middle-of-the-road: The manager tries to meet employee needs and concerns whilst emphasizing on company goals simultaneously and thinks this is the perfect approach; however, problems occur when neither of the goals is fully achieved. The Team or Sound Style: High concern is shown towards both people and production. Teamwork and commitment is highly encouraged among employees. They are made to feel as a part of the company – family and are explained the organizational purpose and production needs. This creates a work environment based on trust and respect whereby high satisfaction and production is achieved. Path Goal Theory The theory states that leaders adopt different strategies and adjust their behaviors in order to find the best solution which suits a particular situation. The leadership tendency is to help subordinates achieve their goals in an effective manner thereby assisting them with guidance and support in order to achieve their own goals as well as those of the organization. The theory highlights four different dimensions of leadership skills which are directive or instrumental, supportive, participative and achievement-oriented leadership styles. The one who knows which style to follow depending upon the situation as well as on the needs of the subordinates can be said an efficient and effective leader. Leaders who follow directive or instrumental approach convey their subordinates about their expectations from them and provide them with specific guidance and enforce procedures and rules. The supportive approach is a friendly approach where the leader pays a strong attention towards the welfare of their subordinates. Involving subordinates in the decision making process is the participative approach whereas, achievement oriented style is highly motivating where the leader emphasizes on improving performance, sets high standards and is confident about their subordinates that they will achieve these standards (Silverthorne, 2001). Similar theory has been explained by Evans (2012) in the book titled, “Path goal theory of leadership.” Fiedler’s contingency model Fiedler’s contingency model was developed in order to predict leader effectiveness and to designate leaders to specific tasks depending upon the situations. The model states that, the leadership style and effectiveness relationship is made less rigorous by the leader’s capability of situational control. The model highlights the significance of group leaders to the motivational propensity of the leader, which is defined as the degree to which the leader is either task or relationship oriented. The model explains three components of situational favorability for leadership influence that is the degree to which a leader can have power or control over subordinate behavior depending as is allowed by the situation. The components are: Leader-member relations: It is the extent to which the leader feels that he/she is accepted and supported by group members. Task structure: It is the extent to which the task is clearly defined with proper goals, procedures, measurable progress, and success. Leader power: It is the extent to which a leader uses his formal position and power to reward and punish the subordinates in order to obtain compliance from them. The model concludes that task-oriented leaders outperform relations-oriented leaders in cases of situations which are very favorable or very unfavorable, while it is vice versa in case of moderately favorable situations (Miller, Butler & Cosentino, 2003). Leadership Style Evaluation In order to evaluate the leadership approach adopted by the leaders in focus we have to first understand how they adopt different strategies and adjust their behavior according to a particular situation. Brain Brain is the country club leader. He hires friends under his authority and does not hold workers accountable for any misconduct and does not even confront employees who fail. He expects his employees to know all the technicalities and thus, does not train workers for advancement. No encouragement is fostered upon the team members for advancement. Brain would choose to do the work on behalf of employees who fail to do them or would ask somebody else to do it. The team members meets the schedules when there is no problem associated; however, they miss it when there are issues related to the task. In these cases, the person asks for Tom’s support. Brain keeps vital information to himself and also tries to keep strong workers from advancing to maintain an even team. Evaluation Having studied the three theories of leadership described in above mentioned sections, it can be said that Brain has a lazy approach of leadership as is explained by Black Mouton managerial grid cited by Zeidan (2009). He follows an impoverished leadership style thereby showing no concern for both the employees and the production. Brain tries to secure his job and job seniority thereby choosing to do the task on behalf of the employees who fail to execute them. The leadership style shows none of the four dimensions of leadership skills as explained by the path goal theory. Brain’s leadership quality does not incorporate the components of situational favorability for leadership influence as described in the Fiedler’s contingency model. The task and goals are not specified clearly to the team members. They are not motivated and advancement is severely discouraged. The leader in this context is neither task oriented nor relation oriented. All this factors contribute to a low turnover being generated by the company. Brain’s division is highly non productive and the working environment is non friendly. Larry Larry is a highly motivated servant leader who caters to work efficiently for the organization and for subordinates as a whole. The leader prefers motivated personnel to qualified personnel. Larry holds employees accountable for their area and at the same time ensures that all their requirements are being met which are necessary for them to succeed. The leader has developed a friendly working environment but at the same time he makes sure that the code of conduct is not breached. Larry trains and encourages employees for advancement and also encourages mutual training among employees. The leader demonstrates exceptional knowledge in aviation maintenance field and team members belong from various background. Evaluation Larry demonstrates the team or sound style of leadership as is explained by the leadership grid model of Black and Mouton. The leader has shown high concern towards both people and production. Under Larry’s leadership teamwork and commitment is highly encouraged among employees. A friendly working environment has been created where the employees are made to feel as a part of the company – family. They are explained about the organizational purpose and production needs thereby forming a work environment based on trust and respect whereby high satisfaction and production is achieved. The leader in this context is highly effective as his decision always depends upon the situation as well as on the needs of his subordinates. Larry’s leadership approach combines the three dimensions of effective leadership skill which are directive approach, supportive approach and achievement oriented style. As far as the Fiedler’s contingency model is concerned, the situations that prevail in his division are highly favorable for leadership influence. The leader’s team consists of highly motivated personnel who demonstrate efficient team work. Advancement is highly encouraged among employees in the team. The concern that Larry shows towards the production side as well as his team member’s welfare makes him both a task oriented and a relation oriented worker and therefore a highly influential and effective leader. Tom Tom is an authoritarian who hires qualified personnel and holds each individual responsible for the area. The leader expects his employees to know their area and states clearly what is expected from them. Element of trust does not exist between the leader and subordinates. Tom is a person who argues with workers. Proper time is not given behind training the workers. Complaints about both management and workers have been received. Failures are attributed to workers alone. Tom often gets into trouble because of his temper and his team is not supportive in general. Evaluation As is evident from Tom’s leadership tendency, he is an authoritarian whose leadership approach reflects the Produce or Perish Style as explained in the Black Mouton managerial grid. Tom is a compliance leader whose only emphasis is on the focus and virtually no concern is shown towards the employees working under him. The person is task oriented leader whose leadership tendency involves setting and enforcing tight schedules. Tom expects team members to deliver every time they are assigned a task. The leader’s vision is price for performance. Since there is no trust relationship between Tom and the immediate subordinates, it can be said that no space for cooperation and collaboration exists in his division. Tom misuses authority as a superior to a huge extent and often gets into trouble because of his attitude and temper. The leadership style does not reflect any of the four dimensions of effective leadership as is explained in the path goal theory. Tom’s leadership is highly ineffective as the leader – member relation is not good. This is evident from the fact that the team is not supportive in general. Although Tom is a task oriented leader, but the lack of a friendly work environment will always act as an obstruction in the path towards progress and henceforth will hinder advancement. Conclusion An effective leader and their leadership style is a significant factor which contributes to a huge extent towards the performance of an organization. Having studied the theories such as: Leadership grid, Path goal theory and the Fiedler’s contingency model in accordance with the leadership behavior of Brain, Larry and Tom it can be said that, Larry is the most efficient and effective leader among the three of them. Larry’s leadership tendency demonstrates the team or sound style which shows equal concerns towards productivity and people. This report will give a better understanding of the changes that are needed to be made in the leadership style at individual, work unit or team and organization level which will lead to the development of a more integrated and specified conceptual framework for the assessment, selection, training and improvement of leaders capable of handling huge responsibilities and tasks assigned to them (Muchiri, Cooksey, Milia & Walumbwa, 2011). References Cope, O., & Waddell, D. (2001). An audit of leadership styles in e – commerce. Managerial Auditing Journal, 16(9), 523-529. Evans, M. G. (2012). Path goal theory of leadership. Arizona: Information Age Publishing. Kay and Associates Inc. (2010). Home. Retrieved from http://www.kayinc.com/. Mackenzie, K., D. (2006), The Lampe Theory of organizational leadership. Multi-Level Issues in Social Systems, 5, 345-428. Miller, R. L., Butler, J., & Cosentino, C. J. (2003). Followership effectiveness: An extension of Fiedler’s contingency model. The Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 25(4), 362–368. Muchiri, M. K., Cooksey, R. W., Di Milia, L. V., & Walumbwa, F. O. (2011). Gender and managerial level differences in perceptions of effective leadership. The Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 32(5), 462–492. Natale, S. M., Sora, S. A., & Kavalipurapu, S., B. (2004). Leadership in teams: Managerial responses. Team Performance Management, 10(3/4), 45-52. Silverthorne, C. (2001). A test of the path-goal leadership theory in Taiwan. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 22(4), 151–158. Zeidan, H. (2009). The Blake Mouton Managerial Grid Identifying five different leadership styles. The Certified Accountant, 39, 82-85. Read More