Leadership in Context - Assignment Example

Leadership in Context Section A Question Evaluate why authentic, adaptive and shared models of leadership should be more appropriate for the 21st century workplace in comparison to the more traditional hierarchical models of leadership.  The environment that a business operates in has dramatically over the last three decades and this compelled business organizations to adapt according to the changing times for them to survive and remain relevant in the marketplace. The changes that compels organizations to adapt include the changing economic conditions, changing workplace and greater mobility of the workforce. These changes are brought and induced by a globalized environment where competition is intensified and geopolitical boundaries virtually erased by advances in technology that intensified competition and made the workforce more mobile. The advances in technology made environmental changes faster than ever requiring organizations to also quickly adapt or be left out by competition. This also made the workforce multi-skilled and highly talented where they could quickly find employment if dissatisfied with their employers making them more valuable than before. Traditional hierarchical leadership is no longer applicable to this new changing business environment. The traditional hierarchical leadership which is highly structured and to some extent even paternalistic where power and authority is concentrated on a central or few power figures is no longer applicable to the changing times. Traditional hierarchical leadership styles emphasise on the exclusive power of the leader to take decisions, at least in regard to the organisation in general (Van Wart 2014). This kind of leadership is unresponsive to the need of the times because it is slow to change due to its centralized leadership and heavy bureaucracy. This heavy bureaucracy also made it inefficient causing its operation costly therefore uncompetitive in the modern market. Bureaucracy and centralization also stunts innovation that could lead the organization for growth. Those who failed to respond to new leadership challenges posed by the changing environment either became obsolete or already out of business. The traditional hierarchical leadership style is not responsive to the new environment that requires flexibility for organizations to quickly adapt to the changes in the market because authority and power are so centralized that they bog down initiative. Also, centralized and hierarchical leadership is not effective in facilitating innovation and creativity in organizations which is now necessary for companies to grow in a competitive environment. The old ways of motivating employees used by the traditional leadership is also no longer applicable in a modern workplace. For example, Taylor’s idea of scientific management of motivating employees only through incentive and pay (Taylor 1911) may have worked in the old traditional and hierarchical organization but is no longer enough to motivate talented employees in the modern and globalized workplace. The workforce in a modern organization tends to seek more than the pay but is looking for fulfilling jobs, career growth and shared leadership which based on ‘the distribution of leadership tasks among group members’ rather a central authority (Salvendy and Karwowski 2010: 41). This means that the workforce in a modern workplace appreciate decisions that are taken by a group and not by a single individual (Rumsey 2012: 153). The new economic environment now requires an adaptive, shared and authentic leadership for business organizations to survive and thrive in this new economic environment. An adaptive leader is a leader that could adjust his or her leadership his leadership style according to the conditions in the organization’s environment (Salvendy and Karwowski, 2010). These new conditions ranges from new and changing economic conditions in a globalized environment to working different with different people in a different structure. Shared leadership is also now appropriate for organizations to grow in a highly competitive marketplace where innovation becomes a necessity for the business to remain relevant. Shared leadership is exercised in various ways in 21st century workplace and this could come in teams, groups or projects where people from different departments have to cooperate in regard to the decision-making process. In terms of hierarchy, modern organizations in the 21st century tends to be flat as the layers of hierarchy are now seen as bureaucracy and organizational deadweight. Delegation and empowerment is now the new order in organizations where power and leadership are shared to make the organization efficient, innovative, responsive and competitive. Comparing the traditional leadership styles to shared leadership, traditional leadership is based on the value of hierarchy as a term for securing leadership success. In contrast, shared leadership is based on authentic leadership that considers the personality of the leaders as more valuable for ensuring high leadership performance (Pless and Maak 2012). Section B Question 2 How do leadership and the management of people differ in different international cultures? Cite two examples of leadership in an international context and explain why there is potential for a Western business or Sporting leader to misinterpret the need for cultural knowledge and understanding when leading or working with employees from different cultural backgrounds. It is a given that people see and interpret the world around according to their own cultural lenses. This is not only peculiar among individuals but is carried in the workplace and sporting events where leaders, athletes, managers and employees alike interpret the world according to their point of view and act according to this understanding. This tendency to interpret the world according to our own cultural lenses lead us to misinterpret other people and also being misinterpreted by other people. This is also true among leaders and managers when they have to lead and manage people from different cultural background or work in an international environment where they are susceptible to misinterpretation when they do not have the cultural agility to understand people coming from other cultural backgrounds. Thus, it is imperative that leaders and managers must orient and develop their cultural aptitude to make themselves more effective (Kotter 1999). This is becoming more important today particularly in a globalized environment where the workforce is getting more culturally diversified. One of the tools that leaders and managers can use are the Hofstede and Globe cultural dimension which involves comparison of various cultures among nations (Grove 2005). We can see the application of these cultural differences in concrete cases. For example, we can take the case of Americans and Middle Eastern people. Americans scores highly on individualism while Middle Eastern individuals scored low in this cultural aspect indicating that they are more collectivist society. Applying this in business, Middle Eastern counterpart would tend to consult more with their peers before making any decisions or before committing to anything. Americans on the other hand would immediately “seize” any opportunity and will decide by himself or himself. When these two cultures transact, Americans would find the behaviour of Middle Eastern counterpart discomforting because they tend to view it as a delaying tactics when their counterpart will have to talk to several people that consumes time. If a leader is not culturally agile to understand it, the leadership might end up futile as the Middle Eastern counterpart would perceive the American as too impatient while the American would tend to view its Middle Eastern counterpart as playing delaying tactics or incompetent. If the Middle Eastern counterpart is an employee, he or she would is certain to resent the attitude of the American for not understanding how they work as a people. Another example we can take on how cultural differences can misinterpret each other is the case of an American and a Chinese. We can provide a typical example of a manager going to China either to do business, set up a plant or contract a third party vendor for their products. Both have different cultural orientation and way of doing business. Their Chinese counterpart or employees often complain that their American partners are brash or even rude and insensitive to people whereas the American may also complain about their Chinese partners tendency for excessive delay and beating around the bush. This could be explain in American culture and values where directness and being straightforward is appreciated while in Chinese culture, rituals of first building a better working relationship must first be built before doing business. Directness without the necessary social protocol is often categorized as brash and even rude in Confucian cultures. Also, the American counterparts does not understand the value of the face or Mianzi among Asians particularly in the Confucian societies such as Chinese (Zhu 2009). Americans may view it as honesty and being transparent while the Chinese perceives it as rude and could even be an unforgivable mistake. In American context, direct reprimand may be taken as nothing personal and is part of the job. But if the same manner of reprimand is done to a Chinese employee, such type of reprimand may not sit well because it is offensive to the sensibilities of the Chinese culture. The employee may end up resigning or productivity to decline instead of improving it because the Chinese employee took the approach of his or her American boss personally. This underscores the need to enhance ones knowledge and understanding when working with employees from different cultural backgrounds to avoid misinterpretations that could lead to a failed business or deteriorated employee performances. Section C Question 1 In what way can leaders in Business or a Sporting environment learn from their understanding of emotional intelligence as a technique for developing self-awareness and empathy in their relationships with others and for enhancing their leadership abilities overall. Emotional intelligence is defined as the ability of one’s person to calibrate his or her own feelings according to the environment and relationship to others. It involves intrapersonal and intelligence which is an intelligence that involves self-awareness and how one relates to others (Carmelli and Josman, 2006). According to Gardner, this kind of intelligence is more important than academic intelligence in succeeding in organizations where there are people and goals involved (1999). In fact, emotional intelligence is a requisite of the ideal form of leadership which is transformational leadership where the leader brings out the best of its followers where the subordinates are inspired to emulate the leader to become the best that they can be and become a leader themselves (Mandell, Barbara and Pherwani 2003). In the process of self-improvement due to the inspiration brought by a transformational leader, the organization benefit in terms of motivated workforce that results to an enhanced productivity and more efficient operation (i.e. less attrition, less absenteeism, less tardiness). Leaders therefore, be it in business, sporting event or any other endeavor must strive to understand emotional intelligence as a technique for developing their self-awareness and empathy in their relationships with others and to enhance their their overall leadership abilities. Self-awareness which is one of the major component of emotional intelligence is a necessary capability for one to become an effective leader. It involves knowing one’s capabilities, shortcomings, temperaments and emotional disposition. Skills like discipline and self-control which are essential qualities of a leader is also an integral part of self-awareness that must be learned by a leader as he or she relates to other people. Empathy on the other hand is a part of interpersonal aspect of emotional intelligence and this enables the leader to better relate to his or her followers (Lyusin 2006). Enhancing this ability would mean the leader is able to work with people in groups and in teams with different social and cultural background. The skill or ability to work and lead people from different background is not only an essential skill of a leader but also an imperative in the new workplace where organizations are encouraged to enhance diversity in their workforce not only in terms of skills and talents but also in terms of cultural and social background. It is important to stress in understanding the importance of emotional intelligence in leadership that leadership involves mainly with people. It involves effective marshalling of people and other resources (i.e. logistics, supplies) so that a certain objective be it in a business organization or a sporting event can be achieved. When one has to deal with people, one has to relate with them effectively and this requires self-awareness and genuine empathy which are a province of emotional intelligence. It is because people tend to follow a leader more whom they know and feel to truly care and understand them. Leaders may induce following through the incentive of pay but this method is short term because of its transactional nature and only works up to a certain extent and then performance eventually declines. Emotional intelligence in fact is a requisite of an idealized form of leadership which is transformational leadership. Transformational leadership is the highest form of leadership because it inspires its followers to improve to become leaders themselves resulting in enhanced performance and higher productivity (Mandell, Barbara and Pherwani 2003). Its followers are motivated not because of the benefits of remuneration that they could get from the leader but are rather driven to improve and become leader themselves. Organizations which are known to have been led by transformational leaders tend to have higher productivity, lower attrition rate, lower absenteeism and lower tardiness. In short, organizations which are led by transformational leaders does not only perform better but also has dedicated employees that makes an organization more efficient as it avoids the waste of attrition and low learning curve. This underscores the benefit and importance of developing emotional intelligence in enhancing their overall leadership abilities. That one must first understand himself or himself first (self-awareness), then to genuinely understand and care for others (empathy) before he or she could inspire and direct people towards a common objective that would make one an effective leader. Bibliography Carmeli, Abraham and Josman, Zvi, E. (2006). The Relationship Among Emotional Intelligence, Task Performance, and Organizational Citizenship Behaviors. Human Performance. (19)4: 403-419 Gardner, H. (1999). Intelligence reframed: Multiple intelligence for the 21st century. New York: Basic Books. Grove, Cornelius (2005). Introduction to the GLOBE Research Project on Leadership Worldwide. Retrieved at http://www.grovewell.com/pub-GLOBE-intro.html LYUSIN, D. B. (2006). Emotional Intelligence as a Mixed Construct: Its Relation to Personality and Gender. Journal of Russian and East European Psychology. (44)6: 54-68 Kotter, J. (1999) What Leader Really Do. Boston: Harvard Business School Press. Mandell, Barbara and Pherwani (2003). RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN EMOTIONAL INTELLIGENCE AND TRANSFORMATIONAL LEADERSHIP STYLE: A GENDER COMPARISON. Journal of Business and Psychology. 17(3): 387-404 Pless, N. and Maak, T. (2012) Responsible Leadership. London: Springer Science & Business Media. Rumsey, M. (2012) The Oxford Handbook of Leadership. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Salvendy, G. and Karwowski, W. (2010) Advances in Occupational, Social, and Organizational Ergonomics. Boca Raton: CRC Press. Taylor, F.W., 1911. Principles of scientific manamgent. New York: Harper. Van Wart, M. (2014) Dynamics of Leadership in Public Service: Theory and Practice. London: Routledge. Welcome to The hofstede centre. (n.d.). Retrieved March 28, 2015, from http://geert-hofstede.com/the-hofstede-centre.html Zhu, Y 2009, Confucian Ethics Exhibited in the Discourse of Chinese Business and Marketing Communication, Journal Of Business Ethics, 88, pp. 517-528, Business Source Complete, EBSCOhost, viewed 28 March 2015. Read More