Challenging Conventional Leadership - Essay Example

 Table of Contents Overview 2 Theoretical review 3 Research question 4 References 5 Overview The constantly changing business environment as a result of economic, technological, legal as well as demographic forces has a significant impact on the way work is conducted in an organization. In addition, it also affects the relationship between the management and the employee (Chung, et al., 2011). The workforce of the modern culture wants to be respected and also expects their contribution to be recognized. They also value being involved in the organizational decision making process and constantly thrive to be in the “eyes of the management” (Chung, et al., 2011, p. 299) of their organization. In the era of a knowledge-based economy, extensive human resources can help an organization attain significant competitive advantage and the same has been recognized by the elites of the organizations (Lepak & Snell, 1999; Wright & McMahan, 1992). In the meanwhile, empowerment is highly recommended as a tactic to foster employee commitment towards the organization thereby implementing changes (Herscovitch & Meyer, 2002). Such is the trait of unconventional leaders. They tend to empower rather than instruct. This suggests that enhancing an organization’s leadership capability which in turn fosters organizational commitments becomes the focal point of change management in an organization. Empirical literatures have suggested that, organizations require a modern leadership style at a time when the organization itself is going through a turbulent phase. In such a context the new leadership style (or rather an unconventional leadership style) has been deemed appropriate by many researchers (Conger & Kanungo, 1994). On the other hand many believe in the fact that conventional leadership style gives more stability to the organization. This is precisely because they tend to go by the book and their leadership style is not reckless in nature. However, many a times it has been seen that a conventional leaders tend to overlook innovation. They are more likely to encourage activity, action and work rather than encouraging innovation, ideas and fun. The topic as to which leadership style is more appropriate has been largely debated by many researchers throughout the world, yet a rigid conclusion has never been reached. This is where the relevance of this research lies. This research paper will cater to identify the alternatives to conventional leadership style that proves to be a challenge to the conventional leaders. The following sections will highlight the modern leadership styles and will establish the difference between them and conventional leadership style. Finally comments will be made regarding the appropriateness of the unconventional leadership attributes in the contemporary business environment. As far as analysing the contemporary leadership styles are concerned, two leadership styles have gained popularity over the recent past. These two leadership styles will be the primary contexts of this research where the researcher will illustrate the different dimensions of these unconventional leadership styles with the underlying objective of identifying their superiority over conventional leadership style. Theoretical review According to Harvey & Buckley (2002), bemoaning the insignificance of majority of the modern leadership techniques as well as theories that have emerged and diminished over the past few decades have become quite an easy task. Many research scholars have stated that such theories have contributed very little to assist managers and leaders in their everyday decision making process. Even managers have come to believe that the area of management has become extensively cluttered with useless and obsolete concepts. This is precisely because of the emergence of an array of new and upcoming leadership concepts and styles in the business environment. Thus, the research paper will basically be inclined towards sidelining numerous of those leadership styles and focus on two of the most prudent yet unconventional leadership styles introduced in the business world. It is widely known that leadership behaviour exhibited within an organization will always depend upon the environment as well as the structure of the world that they belong to. By structure over here, the researchers mean to highlight the capitalist structure or the socialist structure. In the book ‘Envisioning Real Utopias’ author Wright (2009) highlighted various alternatives to the capitalism. This can be viewed as an indirect step forward to set forth the alternatives to conventional leadership style exhibited in a capitalist social structure. Moreover, given the current business environment is concerned where innovation and vision comes at the top of the priority list of every managers, an unconventional is more appropriate. As mentioned above, many researchers stressed about the need for a modern leadership style at a time of turbulence. According to them a leader who exhibits charisma as a force of innovation and change is the most appropriate one. This form of leadership has been witnessed to have transformational effects on their followers and subordinates. Empirical research done in this field have identified that charismatic leadership is correlated positively with the followers understanding of organizational commitment and empowerment (Rowden, 2000). Another leadership style which stands equally tall when compared to the charismatic leadership style is the Self-leadership style where the leader is constantly indulged in a self-influencing procedure in order to manage his/her own feelings, behavior as well as thoughts so that personal effectiveness can be enhanced. Empirical researches have suggested that training of self-leadership enables employees to adapt to the challenges brought about by changes, by imbibing favorable perception about their work environment as well as their competence in their mind (Neck & Manz, 1996). This is a prudent form of leadership which facilitates and all round development of employees which in turn will augment the productivity (both tangible and intangible) of an organization. The outcomes of such a leadership style have always been creativity and psychological empowerment. Given the fact that, organizational commitment is considered one of the key factors that helps an organization to attain competitive advantage, fostering the same is pivotal for an organization. According to Zhang & Bartol (2010), implementing self leadership style or charismatic leadership style will enable an organization to encourage a sense of empowerment and henceforth that will enhance organizational commitment, creativity and foster innovation. However, the question remains regarding whether implementing such leadership styles and not following a conventional one will prove to be successful strategy for companies or not. Research question Unconventional or conventional leadership style: Which is more appropriate? Is charismatic leadership style a better alternative to conventional leadership style or self leadership style? What are the effects of preferring alternative leadership (unconventional/lateral) to conventional leadership? References Chung, A., Chen, I., Yun-Ping Lee, A., Chen, H. C. & Lin, Y. (2011). Charismatic leadership and self-leadership A relationship of substitution or supplementation in the contexts of internalization and identification? Journal of Organizational Change Management, 24(3), 299-313. Conger, J. A. & Kanungo, R. N. (1994). Charismatic leadership in organizations: perceived behavioral attributes and their measurement. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 15(5), 439-452. Harvey, M., & Buckley, M. R. (2002). Assessing the "conventional wisdoms" of management for the 21st century organization. Organizational Dynamics, 30(4), 368-378. Herscovitch, L. & Meyer, J. P. (2002). Commitment to organizational change: extension of a three-component model. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(3), 474-487. Lepak, D. P. & Snell, S. A. (1999). The human resource architecture: toward a theory of human capital allocation and development. Academy of Management Review, 24, pp. 31-48. Neck, C. P. & Manz, C. C. (1996). Thought self-leadership: the impact of mental strategies training on employee cognition, behavior, and affect. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 7(5), 445-467. Rowden, R. W. (2000). The relationship between charismatic leadership behaviors and organizational commitment. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 21(1), 30-35. Wright, E. O. (2010). Envisioning Real Utopias. Retrieved from http://www.ssc.wisc.edu/~wright/ERU_files/ERU-full-manuscript.pdf Wright, P.M. & McMahan, G.C. (1992). Theoretical perspectives for strategic human resource management. Journal of Management, 18, 295-320. Zhang, X. & Bartol, K.M. (2010). Linking empowering leadership and employee creativity: the influence of psychological empowerment, intrinsic motivation, and creative process engagement. Journal of Management, 53(1), 107-128. Read More