Charismatic and Transformational Leaders - Admission/Application Essay Example

Charismatic and Transformational Leaders Charismatic and transformational leaders are the only effective leaders in today’s organization Introduction Charismatic and transformational leaders exhibit almost similar conducts. They define a category of leadership that involves motivation and enhancements of employees’ morale using diverse methods. This category insinuates following up of the employees’ performance in an organization with the intention of ensuring improvement though via inspiring. It also entails identifying of different aspects of employees’ ability in order to align abilities with tasks within an organization. The two forms of leadership are advantageous in organizational prosperity like enhancing satisfaction, organizational commitment, adoption of efficient organizational culture, efficient change implementation and ensuring appropriate decision making. Therefore, it is evidently clear both charismatic and transformational leaders are the only effective leaders in today’s corporate world. Discussion section The issue concerning transformational leadership as the best modern pattern in organization management may assume diverse bases. The first basis may depend on trends and best practices, which the leadership styles imply. The best practices are the recognized standards of operations that favor success. The other issue that would be resourceful in evaluating this claim is by identifying various merits, which the two leadership characteristics have over other forms of leaderships in today’s organizations. The two forms of leadership investigate the identity of an individual within an organization. This insinuates that an understanding of certain concepts and theories regarding to individual behaviors would be necessary in investigating the claim concerning the two forms of leaderships. One of the most prevalent theories that affect human conduct in any firm encompasses motivation theory. Motivation refers to obtaining a driving force that compels a person to work towards a given goal voluntarily but out of passion (Vempati, 2013). Different organizations attempt to meet motivational thresholds by offering various elements like high pays. Diverse theories have existed in explaining this element in different ways though there is no clear way of performing this action. This is where the two forms of leadership become helpful. These two forms of leadership have the foundation of motivating the employees to work towards a given goal in an institution. According to Abraham Maslow’s theory of motivation, there are different stages in which a person becomes satisfied (Honoree, 2009). However, some sections of one’s needs require an understanding of an employee in order to achieve this success. They embrace self-esteem and self-actualization needs that necessitate a leader to know what an employee may really demand in order to favor motivation practices. This implies a leader should be outstanding in a way that allows followers to embrace characters of the leader. Leaders also ought to play a role in ensuring that they give appropriate tasks to employees, which are efficient ways of ensuring motivation in the workplace. Hence, these factors justify the two forms of leadership styles to be efficient in the organizations today. Best practices in management today demands job satisfaction at the workplace (Omar, & Fauzi, 2013). This implies that employees require job positions and tasks that would make them foster and acceptance of their duties. Hence, entailing for a strategy that would ensure that employees find passion in what they are doing in order to maintain their duties charged by respective organizations. Job satisfaction refers to the level of contentment that an individual receives in performing a given job (Omar, & Fauzi, 2013). As aforementioned, charismatic and transformational leadership offer a position that insinuate choosing the right task and positions for the employees. This would derive satisfaction at the working place since tasks given to employees match their respective capabilities of the individuals as proposed by charismatic leaders. This allows leaders practicing in this line to institute measures necessary for appropriate task allocation based on one’s expertise. This implies clear understanding of the characteristics of an employee ensures that there is an adequate plan for meeting the fundamental best practices of management. Additionally, the transformational as well as charismatic leaders are always close to the employees in terms of monitoring and supervision. This means the assigned personnel is capable of submitting satisfactory feedbacks to their supervisors. This would foster satisfaction due to positive appraisals by employees. There are employee relation theories emerging in the present world. The management theorists argue that, relationship between employees and their leaders is the primary way of fostering an efficient organizational culture (Mahalinga, & Saur, 2012). Employee relation refers to the framework of ensuring a healthy employer-employee relationship (Mahalinga, & Saur, 2012). This implies the association between employees and their leaders requires a definite framework of practice in order to facilitate realization of set organizational objectives. The relationship in these leadership styles compels subordinates always to undertake similar activities, which their respective leader performs. This relationship is healthy because leaders will always lead by examples in their places of work. Besides, employees need a leader who will uphold a given trait (Eubanks, Brown, & Ybema, 2012). This move is essential in ensuring appropriate culture in an organization. Hence, implying a leader in the management sector can easily institute a culture in the organization by establishing a trait or characters that will compel employees to follow embrace it (Birwa, 2009). The two forms of leadership can achieve this demand. Charismatic and transformational leaderships uphold positive traits in the organization and its related tasks. The two forms of leaderships offer interactive approach in the management level, which extends even to employees. This would ensure positive aspects between leaders and their subordinates thus leading to a comprehensive strategy in relation in an institution. The two forms of leadership effect change in an organization, which is inescapable aspect of an organization (Pruna, & Pruna, 2012). Change refers to the dynamics that need continuous reforms over a given period (Pruna & Pruna, 2012). Trends of doing any given category of work would always change over time in the business sectors. Instituting change in an organization is becoming one of the issues of debate concerning global business trends (Esu & Inyang, 2010). This is in relation to the complex human behaviors that may not be easily alterable despite employees being an essential part of any corporate. However, they pose strategic hindrance to change. The diversity at the workplace means employees pose diverse approaches to life. Some of the employees may be positively responsive to change while other end up giving change a conservative approach, which is a vital deterrent to an organization’s progress. Therefore, leadership and management of any organization must always seek different ways of paving way for change in an institution. Charismatic and transformational styles activities encompass keen understanding of employees with the intention of developing them in their respective areas (Esu & Inyang, 2010). This gives leaders a way of breakthrough in which they can easily convince subordinates to accept change (Esu & Inyang, 2010). Transformational as well as charismatic leaders are themselves agents of change (Esu & Inyang, 2010). This implies that they are always working towards change. The employees would adopt the attitude of change since due to the nature of these leadership styles. This would make change a simple culture to implement in such institution. Communication is a vital factor in an organization. The two forms of leadership advocates both establishment and maintenance of communication culture (Garcia, 2012). Communication in an organization refers to the process by which information flows between the superiors and subordinates in an organized manner. This primary factor is subject to consideration under the best practices of an institution. Communication practices between the groups may even foster personal understanding between these categories of people. Communication theories in an organization have always established in the previous times. Theorists propose a communication strategy that would flow and enhance understanding. According to researches, so far contacted, informal communication has proven to improve networking among employees and leaders. Transformational and charismatic forms of leadership imply an informal aspect of communication in any corporation. The leader in this style creates a healthy environment between them and subordinates. These informal relationships between categories of people imply a positive change in terms of performance in an organization (Fox, 2013). This is necessary in transmission of an essential message within the organization. These forms of leaderships by adopting informal communication strategies find easy ways of issuing commands in the institution. This would account for a long run improvement in performance. The two forms of leadership styles enhance commitment among employees (Marcos, & Sridevi, 2010). Apart from motivation, organization commitment is also a central driver of performance in an organization. Organizational commitment refers to the desire of an employee to remain working in an organization for a long period while he or she gives the best, hence being a valuable asset to that firm (Lattimer, 2008). This value is an important business trend in the modern world. The two forms of leadership enhance organizational commitment in that the forms of leadership create a harmonious environment that provides for employment performance for employees. This activity provides an opportunity for improvement in an organization (Loon, Lim, Teck, & Cai, 2012). Hence, this leads to low turnover in an organization, which makes both charismatic and transformational leaders outstanding among the existing leadership styles (Brandt, Christofis, Kasibhatla, Malindretos, & Maruffi, 2012). The two styles foster confidence among employees. This is a necessary factor in safeguarding employees’ safety (Brandt, Christofis, Kasibhatla, Malindretos, & Maruffi, 2012). They acquire organizational commitment due to comfort and efficient relations provided by the transformational and charismatic leaders. Decision-making is a fundamental process in an organization whereby leaders and their followers always engage in revising diverse aspects of the organization in order to create consistent goals (Prewitt, Weil, & McClure, 2011). This calls for an effective way of involving and ensuring appropriate measures for change. Leaders recognize employees in the decision process in two central ways. The first one is that leaders recognize employee as means to an end in the decision-making process. Another way is that leaders recognize employees are according to the Kantanian perspective where they are not used as the means to an end in the decision-making (Prewitt, Weil, & McClure, 2011). Transformational and charismatic leadership have adopted the view of employees in a way that does not give them a view meaning to an end. Through this, employees have viewed themselves as an essential part of decision-making process. The significance of this approach is that employees would receive recognition in an organization. This also makes them work hard towards a common set goal that an organization wishes to achieve. This makes the form of leadership outstanding among the others that may not be able to initiate employee involvement in decision-making. The influence of legitimate power in an institution is of essentiality in any leadership section. The way a follower perceives a leader in an organization is significant for the success of varied plan executions. Legitimate power refers to the power and perception that a person receives due to a given position or status (Drennan, & Richey, 2012). Transformational leadership uses power in an effective way while tackling management position. They portray a view of competence and enormous skills to the employees (Drennan, & Richey, 2012). This is a fundamental approach in ensuring integrity and performance of employees in an institution. The transformational leaders also show experience in the way they execute their duties in an organization. This practice is one of the current trends that are observable in the current organizational settings. The trait of a transformational leader ensures an appeal of commitment to the follower in an organization. The traits foster positivity on the employees in terms of the overall outcome an institution (Denehy, 2008). This idea makes these forms of leadership outstanding in the global trends pertaining to organizations. Transformational and charismatic leadership incorporates employee retention (Sandbar & Moreman, 2011). One of the best practices in an organization involves employee retention at their workplaces. Employee retention refers to the ability of an organization to maintain the existing employees under the employment contract (Sandbar & Moreman, 2011). The current theories explain that retention of employees is one of the cost saving factors that leaders can engage in within an institution. This calls for the existence of an efficient mechanism that would allow employees to practice their skills in an organization for a long period. The advantage of employee retention is that there would be minimal disruptions in the process of undertaking various activities due o factors such as recruitment if employees (Whitcomb, 2012). Other advantages include low training costs to the employees. This factor contributes to the progress of an organization. The transformational and charismatic leaders engage in retention of employees by nurturing the talents that the employees possess. Developing the talents of employees make them better alongside receiving recognition. This is a potential way that the charismatic and transformational leaders foster satisfaction and commitment among employees (Sadeghi, & Zaidatol, 2012). This makes the stay of employees in a situation a success hence retention. They also ensure the development of skills through personal guidance to the personnel. These strategies are efficient in ensuring increased retention ability among the employees. This factor also fosters an assurance of security to the employees. Retention of employees provides an assurance to the employment tenure of personnel (Shunlong, & Weiming, 2012). This creates a gap for motivation among the employees. This is one of the outstanding factors that make these forms of leadership effective in the contemporary societies (Sadeghi, & Zaidatol, 2012). Transformational and charismatic leaderships ensure an increased diversity management in an organization. Diversity in this perspective refers to the extents of distinction among people at the workplace. Diversity is one of the central ways of ensuring an appropriate image in an organization. It shows the level of affirmative action that an institution incorporates in its activities (Eghdamy, 2013). This is also a best practice in the management of employees at the workplaces. Transformational and charismatic leaders have the capability of accommodating diverse workforce in their spheres of influence (Camps, & Rodriguez, 2011). They understand the employees in a personal way. They also attempt to engage in their culture and beliefs in order to get a proper understanding to their way of thinking. This implies a level of acceptance in the society due to lacks of bias (Meyerhof, 2012). This makes the two forms of leadership outstanding in line with the current trends in management. Additionally, management of employees at the workplace is also a central concern. The management requires a tactical approach in ensuring healthy workplace conditions. Transformational and charismatic leaders provide humble environments in terms of relations. This creates a given level of commitment that would result to satisfaction and retention. This makes transformational and charismatic forms of leadership outstanding among the other leadership models. The two forms of leadership enhance productivity. Productivity refers to the ratio pertaining to the input and output that would be obtained at the end of production. These styles of leaderships allow for development of certain traits in employees that would automatically lead to an increased productivity. Therefore, employees in this sector are driven by the traits that their leaders portray (Michelin, Lipicnik, & Tekavcic, 2010). This would foster positive traits like minimal absenteeism, appropriate attitude, and even quality performance. All these activities imply there would be an increase in performance levels in relation to the work, which employees would be doing in an organization. Higher production is a global trend in the management sector. The managers and leaders are constantly looking for ways of increasing quality output per worker in an organization. These two forms of leaderships are the basis of establishing efficient productivity in an organization. They allow for development of skills through a close supervision and monitoring of performance (Michelin, Lipicnik, & Tekavcic, 2010). This increases efficiency thus leading to higher productions. This makes the two methods of leadership outstanding in ensuring improvement in the contemporary society settings. Conclusion Two forms of leaderships involve understanding employees, nurturing them towards success and understanding their beliefs in order to gear them towards greater performance. Activities involved in this case are essential in ensuring quality production in any given institution ready to utilize its workers as necessitated. The two forms of leaderships assist in establishing efficient entrepreneurial culture in an organization. Additionally, the two leadership styles establish motivation success that would enhance employee performance. They also ensure efficient communication and change cultures in an organization. . It is evidently clear charismatic and transformational leaders are the only effective leaders in today’s organization. References Birwa, S. (2009). Organizational Culture & Transformational Leadership as Predictors of Employee Performance. Indian Journal of Industrial Relations, 44(4), 611-627 Brandt, C. J., Christofis, A., Kasibhatla, K. M., Malindretos, J., & Maruffi, B. (2012). Transformational leadership: Lessons in management for today. International Business Research, 5(10), 227-232 Camps, J., & Rodriguez, H. (2011). Transformational leadership, learning, and employability. Personnel Review, 40(4), 423-442 Denehy, J. (2008). Leadership characteristics. The Journal of School Nursing, 24(3), 107-10 Drennan, F. S., & Richey, D. (2012). Skills-based leadership. Professional Safety, 57(2), 59-63 Eghdamy, H. (2013). Transformative leadership. Interdisciplinary Journal of Contemporary Research in Business, 4(9), 93-98 Esu, B. B., (PhD.), & Inyang, B. J., (PhD.). (2010). Leadership development, trends, and emergence research: Implications for national development. Interdisciplinary Journal of Contemporary Research in Business, 1(9), 115-129 Eubanks, D. L., Brown, A. D., & Ybema, S. (2012). Leadership, identity, and ethics. Journal of Business Ethics, 107(1), 1-3 Fox, T. (2013, Sep 06). Improving employee performance reviews. Washington Post – Blogs Garcia, H. F. (2012). Leadership communications: Planning for the desired reaction. Strategy & Leadership, 40(6), 42-45 Honoree, J. (2009). Employee Motivation. Consortium Journal of Hospitality & Tourism, 14(1), 63-75. Lattimer, R. L. (2008). Transformational strategy and competitiveness. Competition Forum, 6(1), 5-14 Loon, M., Lim, Y. M., Teck, H. L., & Cai, L. T. (2012). Transformational leadership and job- related learning. Management Research Review, 35(3), 192-205 Mahalinga Shiva, M. S., A., & Saur, D. (2012). Transformational leadership, organizational culture, organizational effectiveness, and program outcomes in non-governmental organizations. Voluntas, 23(3), 684-710 Marcos, S., & Sridevi, M. S. (2010). Employee engagement: The key to improving performance. International Journal of Business and Management, 5(12), 89-96 Mendez, R. M., Munoz, J., Gerardo Seraf, & Munoz, M. A., Monserrat Vera. (2013). Leadership styles and organizational effectiveness in small construction businesses in Puebla, Mexico. Global Journal of Business Research, 7(5), 47-56 Meyerhof, M. (2012). Affirmative Action. African American Review, 45(1/2), 234-235. Michelin, K. K., Msc, Lipicnik, B., PhD, & Tekavcic, M., PhD. (2010). Ethical leadership. International Journal of Management and Information Systems, 14(5), 31-41 Omar, W. A. W., & FauziHussin. (2013). Transformational leadership style and job satisfaction relationship: A study of structural equation modeling (SEM). International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, 3(2), 346-365 Prewitt, J., Weil, R., & McClure, A. (2011). Developing leadership in global and multi-cultural organizations. International Journal of Business and Social Science, 2(13) Pruna, S., & Pruna, M. (2012). Implementing changes in organizations. Several considerations. Journal of Criminal Investigations, 5(1), 29-35 Sadeghi, A., & Zaidatol Akmaliah, L. P. (2012). Transformational leadership and its predictive effects on leadership effectiveness. International Journal of Business and Social Science, 3(7) Sandber, Y., & Moreman, C. M. (2011). Common threads among different forms of charismatic leadership. International Journal of Business and Social Science, 2(9) Shunlong, X., & Weiming, Z. (2012). The relationships between transformational leadership, LMX, and employee innovative behavior. The Journal of Applied Business and Economics, 13(5), 87-96 Vempati, A. I. (2013). A modern approach of management in motivation of employees/methods of employee motivation: A modern approach. Golden Research Thoughts, 2(7), 1-5. Whitcomb, J. (2012). Employee retention. Training, 49(6), 52-54 Read More