Transformational and Charismatic Leadership - Report Example

ORGANIZATIONAL LEADERSHIP Executive summary Leadership has been defined as being a ‘position’ within an organization and a character of a person who would then carry the title of a leader. Leadership has been an interesting topic of analysis and has a variety of definitions with the most outstanding being the capacity of a person or a group of persons to influence the behavior of others towards realization of redefined goal(s). The study of leadership is very important especially while one studies organizational behavior as organizations (both NGOs and for-profits) are often well structured with definite lines of authority and objectives. The main traits of a leader are in mobilization, inspiration and motivations of persons while undertaking collective action for the purpose of pursuing common goal. While differences would be pointed out between the leadership as applies to profit oriented organizations as well as the NGOs, there are common traits that would be pointed out to hold true for any leader and these may be influenced by personal character, intelligence, credibility as well as expertise among other human related attributes. However, practicing as a leader within organizations is dependent on organizational structure as the two organizations in the context of these study exhibit variations in organizational structures. It is to be noted that leadership theories and models have been developed and studied over years on their relevance and influence on leadership in general context. However, this report investigates the application of transformational and charismatic leadership theories as relates to leadership in profit organizations and the NGOs or otherwise organizations often regarded as nonprofit making. This report will therefore adopt a structure with characteristics of transformational leadership, transactional leadership, comparison in leadership within NGOs and the profit oriented organizations and a discussion section with focus on theoretical perspective in NGO leadership. Besides, the report would derive some conclusions and recommendations from the entire report towards future analytical studies in the theme. (Key words: NGO, for-profit organizations, transformational leadership, charismatic leadership, leadership models.) Table of contents Executive summary…………………………………………………………………………2 Introduction…………………………………………………………………………………5 Leadership models…………………………………………………………………………..5 Transformational leadership……………………………………………………………….6 Charismatic leadership……………………………………………………………………...7 Comparative analysis……………………………………………………………………….8 Discussion……………………………………………………………………………………10 Conclusion…………………………………………………………………………………...11 Recommendation……………………………………………………………………………12 Introduction We note that leadership is fundamental in the success of any organization (be it rofit oriented or otherwise) and may depend on personal traits, qualities as well as characters, intelligence, expertise as well as on credibility as human attributes. General features that are captured in the definition above are together with aspects of inspiring vision among the team members being led, planning and executing, creating vision as well as organizing among others. There are also basic traits that are considered positive to leadership which are intelligence, determination, self-confidence, integrity and honesty, extroversion, conscientiousness and skills in problem solving (Thompson & Mchugh, 2009, p. 329-343). This report however notes that there are various types of leaders depending on individual characteristics and institutional structure within an organization. Understanding leadership in organizational management requires the proper interpretation of these traits within the context of leadership. Differences are notable in the nature of leadership as being charismatic or transformational as dictated by personal interests of both the leader and the team being led and the organizational structure. Although there are various aspects to consider while analyzing organizational leadership, this report focuses on evaluating charismatic and transformational type’s o leadership as they apply within profit and nonprofit organizations. Leadership models Various authors have written intensively on the theme of leadership with attention being conferred more in group context and the acts or behaviors of the individuals that are perceived higher in rank within a group context. Particular attention has been given towards understanding transformational leadership as compared to charismatic leadership and the applicability in leadership of organizations. Transformational leadership In this type of leadership model, the effect of leadership takes center stage as against the character of the leadership as is the case with charismatic leadership. The kind of leadership is esteemed for causing change in social systems and in individuals within an organization as necessary for the realization of the desired goals in common. This form of leadership thrives with the leaders pursuing making followers into leaders through inspiring valuable change within them. The definition therefore takes special focus on the capacity of the style of leadership to confer morale, motivation as well as inspiration into the followers and the subjects. Through these attributes, the leader(s) are able to mobilize the efforts and missions of followers towards realization of the entire organization’s vision and goal (Colbert, 2004, p. 1-8). Accordingly, the initial idea behind the type of leadership was that both that leader and the subjects inspire and boost morale of each other while interacting at work environment. The model of leadership shows that leaders and the subjects thrive in a platform where give-and-take ideology exists and the leaders are taken as models in character and leadership towards realization of an organization’s goals. The model exhibits elements inherent within this type of leadership as being individualized consideration, intellectual stimulation, inspirational motivation as well as idealized influence. Transformational kind of leadership has been shown as very vital to the success of any organization and ten leaders’ bears some or all of the following traits. He/she exhibits high sense of being a role model and exhibits high values. Besides, through the people within the organization, the leader develops and pursues visions and in often instances, he/she works as a change agent for the organization (Beugr, Acar & Braun, 2006, p. 52-60; Lee, 2007, p.1-5). Charismatic leadership Every organization’s success is dependent on the kind of a leader or the leadership structure instituted. A leader has the capacity to improve or otherwise fail an organization which he/she leads through the kind of leadership he/she institutes. With charismatic leadership, the leader is said to have higher sense of charisma. Charisma has been interpreted to imply some sort of divine capacity of gift which when applied in leadership then confers the kind of leadership the structure or position of being charismatic (McCarthy, 2005, . 47-50). According to Weber, a charismatic leader possess traits that are not inherently influential from the perspective of commanding authority or coercing the subjects but rather being inherently evident that the leader poses natural features which necessitate following by others (Aaltio-Marjosola & Takala, 2000, p. 146-153). The leadership therefore thrives not in the capacity of the individual to command follow-up through external features and or power but through natural traits which enable him develop ideas and inspire following through inherent characters. In fact, it is from the observable natural capacity that an individual with the type of leadership traits attracts following by others not necessarily with any assurance of success in what they undertake but for the mere reason that he/she exhibits traits of leadership. Charismatic kind of leadership has some basic characteristic features which include that the leader is dissatisfied on status quo, bears a compelling vision, applies unconventional strategies while pursuing a goal and that he/she applies realistic approach while assessing on constraints and resources for an organization (Crant & Bateman, 2000, p. 65-70; James Poon, 2000, p. 25-28). However, besides attracting following from the subjects being led, the leadership enhances followers’ self-conceptions and this becomes strategic in effective leadership as prerequisite to successful running of the organization. The leaders in this framework bear intrinsic and natural affection for autonomy, morality as well as achievement (335-338). Comparative analysis NGO leadership: Leadership structures at organizational as well as individual level in NGOs differ from such structures that are involved within for-profit organizations. Under such, it is widely accepted that the hurdles and difficulties experienced by these leaders differ from those that for-profit organizations face in the sense that they attract different organizational structures. Apostu, (2013, p. 145-155) shows that the leaders within NGOs are often unsupported and isolated and this is much attributed with poor leadership as characterized by poor talent. Experience as well as best practice often lack within leadership structures of NGOs. Most of the NGOs are humanitarian king of institutions, which work within remote and less developed regions with the aim of reaching the marginalized and the needy within such societies. This therefore points towards the hardships that subject, just like their leaders have to overcome towards realization of the organization’s objectives. Under such, the leaders are forced to work overtime, in strenuous environments and risk very volatile social economic as well as political conditions within a region. The leaders here therefore often exhibit paternalistic dimension in leadership, activism, managerial as well as catalytic attributes of leadership. Research have shown that effectiveness in leadership by NGO leaders depends much on the environment within which they work as against through inherent traits as seen through other kinds of leadership (Okorley & Nkrumah, 2012, p. 340-350). The lack of effective leadership therefore illustrates that although NGOs are perceived as critical; neither proper transformational and or charismatic leadership thrives in the leadership. However, one would acknowledge that leadership in NGOs is not inherently on individual persons but rather on particular forms of relationships. Rapid growth of the NGOs and eruption of crises requires that leaders develop high levels of interpersonal relations as well as the capacity to make choices on competing needs. By the fact that NGOs are often aimed at transforming the lives of the target groups, this report establishes that transformational kind of leadership proves very supportive and important in an NGO. While some of the important attributes can be gained from the inherent self, learning and practicing have been shown to be strategically useful in shaping the kind of leadership NGOs adopt. In conclusion therefore, literatures have pointed towards the alarming reality of lack of leadership within NGOs while effectiveness in leadership brings about transformation of the living by the disadvantaged as are often the target to such organizations (Hardy, Bruce, 2007, p. 3-6). For profit organization’s leadership: Profit oriented organizations are quite different from the NGOs in that any leadership instituted works not necessarily towards improving the livelihood of the society within which it operates but rather to realize as high market share in returns as possible. Research shows that the leadership model adopted within majority o such organizations is an amalgamation or a combination of various models which have the capacity to compliment and supplement each other for effectiveness of the organization in its operations (Chung, I-Heng, Lee, Chen & Lin, 2011, p. 299-310). The idea behind supporting adoption of various models in leadership of a profit organization is that while one model may fail, another model may be relied upon in reinstating the organization in the right track in realizing profit as against relying on only one model through which an organization would be facing higher risks. Not only will the for-profit organizations employ the transformational models of leadership and the charismatic models as discussed above but would also employ other leadership models as have not been analyzed in this report. For instance, transformational type of leadership contributes towards the vision, innovation as well as charisma into an organization which have the potential of influencing the realization of profits for an organization. He leadership models adopted are meant to boost the performance of an organization through improving on team spirit, empowerment as well as delegation which are attributed to increased productivity as well as general profitability. Discussion In organizational behavior and theory, issues have been raised on whether leadership is natural and or learnt as an art with diverse opinions being cited in support of either. The adoption of a leadership structure within an organization is a strategic feature in understanding leadership, as the hierarchy is definite in responsibilities that every person within the structure is responsible of. According to Fiedler’s model of leadership, situational favorable are the main factors that influence leadership at contingent levels. According to contingent theory of leadership, there are three levels relevant in leadership and they include task structure, relations between leader-members as well as position of power by the leader. Accordingly, the model postulates that a leadership is more favorable according to its structure, definition as well as routine as for the structure. In relations, leadership is more favorable when it attracts more liking as well as trust while power relates to coercion, rewards and punishments which all influences how favorable the leadership is (Arfsten, 2006, p 1-15). However, the point of conflict that arises in this theoretical framework is on how the situational variables would deal adequately with group characteristics such as inter-group relations with profit and non-profit motives taking commanding influence. Critics of the model favor democracy in leadership as this would be more concerned with interpersonal relations as against situational variables only. However, Thompson and Mchugh (2009, p 1-23) acknowledges that there remains a tag between such views that leadership as a behavior would be restructured to fit a particular situation and the opinion that leadership would be defined in structure and not influenced by situation. The fielder’s model therefore is presented as a critical model in the foregoing discussion as it sheds light on the features of leadership in acceptability and otherwise as seen from the eyes of critiques. However, it is worth noting that there are other models that equally advance the theme of leadership in the context of organizational behavior. Other dimensions in leadership that are considered are the split between the transformational and charismatic leadership to yield the features of directive leadership, achievement oriented leadership, supportive leadership as well as participative leadership. Further transformational leadership is shown to esteem the action higher to the person carrying out the action (Bryson, 2013, p. 1-9). Besides, there is then charismatic leader whose main characteristics are being an enabler, being a team builder, an enthusiastic learner, reflective and who has genuine care on people among others (Choi, 2006, p. 24-40). Conclusion The leadership process in any organization is a multifaceted responsibility that is bestowed on a particular individual(s) mainly for ease of coordination, decision making and being the main vision carrier to the organization (Fitzgerald & Schutte, 2010, p. 495). It is then most likely that the person would have a lot of responsibilities and duties to attend to as the leader. Effective coordination of organizations activities and programs requires that leaders exhibit appropriate skills and competences in order to be effective in leading others towards realization of a given objective and running the organization as the vision bearer (.Lussier & Achua, 2013, p. 4). There are many tools that a leader can adopt for effectiveness with involving the subjects and being vision carrier being pointed as most effective among others. This is because, involvement of other staff in a particular responsibility not only brings talent and specialization on board but also helps the leader in pursuing the main objective of the organization; transforming and improving the lives of people within a society and profit being the main goals of NGOs and for-profit organizations respectively. The report has relied on literature on the subject of leadership through which the main difference in leaderships as adopted by NGOs and the for-profit organizations has been evaluated. Basic to the difference noted have been on the purposes and missions of these organizations where the NGOs have been pointed to target disadvantage populations for transformational motive in improving the livelihoods of such people. However, the for-profit organization is mainly focused on market segments covered which equally explains the profitability of such organizations. While transformational leadership does well with the NGOs, any singular type of leadership has been shown as undesirable for the profit oriented organizations hence the position that such organizations rely on multifaceted types of models of leadership. Many models are not only effective in introducing various attributes as are distinct with the particular models but also because they help in diversifying the risks for improved performance in realization of profits (Ledbetter, 2005, p. 2-7). Recommendation: As the literature have shown leaders within NGOs should adopt and use transformational model in leadership while the profit oriented organizations should consider incorporate various models in efforts to diversify on risks of losing on profit margins as is the basic motive. Bibliography Arfsten, D.J. 2006, Servant leadership: A quantitative study of the perceptions of employees of a Christian-based, for-profit organization, Colorado State University, Colorado. Apostu, D., PhD. 2013, "Non-Governmental Organization Leadership And Development. A Review Of The Literature",Manager, , no. 17, pp. 145-161. Aaltio-Marjosola, I. & Takala, T. 2000, "Charismatic leadership, manipulation and the complexity of organizational life",Journal of Workplace Learning, vol. 12, no. 4, pp. 146-158. Beugr, C.D., Acar, W. & Braun, W. 2006, "Transformational leadership in organizations: an environment-induced model",International Journal of Manpower, vol. 27, no. 1, pp. 52-62. Bryson, D. 2013, Diversifying NGO Leadership, Stanford Social Innovation Review, Stanford University, Stanford. Choi, J. 2006, "A Motivational Theory of Charismatic Leadership: Envisioning, Empathy, and Empowerment", Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, vol. 13, no. 1, pp. 24-43. Colbert, A.E. 2004, Understanding the effects of transformational leadership: The mediating role of leader-follower value congruence, The University of Iowa, Lowa. Chung, A., I-Heng, C., Lee, A.Y., Chen, H.C. & Lin, Y. 2011, "Charismatic leadership and self-leadership", Journal of Organizational Change Management, vol. 24, no. 3, pp. 299-313. Crant, J.M. & Bateman, T.S. 2000, "Charismatic leadership viewed from above: The impact of proactive personality", Journal of Organizational Behavior, vol. 21, no. 1, pp. 63-75. Fitzgerald, S. & Schutte, N.S. 2010, "Increasing transformational leadership through enhancing self-efficacy", The Journal of Management Development, vol. 29, no. 5, pp. 495-505. Hardy, Bruce, PhD,M.A., M.Ed 2007, "leadership in NGOs: Is it all that different than the For-profit sector?/leadership au sein des ong : Est-ce différent du secteur à but lucratif?", The Canadian Manager, vol. 32, no. 1, pp. 4-6,3. James Poon, T.F. 2000, "Charismatic leadership", Equal Opportunities International, vol. 19, no. 8, pp. 24-28. Lee, E. 2007, The effects of equity sensitivity and personality on transformational leadership behavior, The University of Texas at Arlington, Texas. Ledbetter, B.L. 2005, Exploring the intersection of values and leadership for women executives in the for-profit sector, Pepperdine University, California. Lussier, R. N. & Achua, C. F. 2013. Leadership: theory, application & skill development (5th ed), South-Western Cengage learning, Mason, OH, USA. McCarthy, A.J. 2005, "conjectures on charismatic leadership", Allied Academies International Conference.Academy of Organizational Culture, Communications and Conflict.Proceedings, vol. 10, no. 1, pp. 47-50. Okorley, E.L. & Nkrumah, E.E. 2012, "Organisational factors influencing sustainability of local non-governmental organisations", International Journal of Social Economics, vol. 39, no. 5, pp. 330-341. Thompson P. & Mchugh D., 2009. “Organizations: a critical approach”. 4th ed. Palgrave Macmillan, London. Read More