Leadership Theory, Effective Leadership - Essay Example

Leadership Theory Table of Contents Introduction 3 Discussion 3 Leader as Strategy Designers 3 Managers as implementers 5 Theoretical assessment 6 Organizational examples 8 Conclusion 9 Reference List 11 Introduction Effective leadership is one of the most commonly detected phenomenons facilitating organizational success. Leadership is essential in providing direction to an organization. It is also the pivotal factor giving rise to motivation, morale and setting clear visions for the future course of actions. Without strategic leader, organizations and their members tend to lose integrity and often get misdirected in the wrong path. Leaders effectively identify the path which an organization is required to take and how it is required to operate in the industry to achieve success. As designers of strategy, leaders combine resources, technologies and various other functions so that the desired objectives can be achieved. Leaders are also required to gain the trusts of their employees and subordinates so that they are able to easily confide with the instructions provided. Leaders are also the transmitters of information and crucial information between stakeholders. It is often their responsibility to convince stakeholders in respect of different organizational decisions (House, et al., 2002). As designers of strategy, the task of planning and guiding an entire institution is not simple. Leaders must crucially identify the needs of the firm, its strengths and weaknesses, their relative position in the market and its general long run objectives before designing strategies. In contrast to the role of leaders as strategy developers, managers are required to implement strategies. As strategy implementers, a manager’s role is basically to get the work done. Implementation of strategy is carried out through dividing the responsibilities amongst subordinate, providing necessary instructions and following up the performance to ensure there are no deviations. Managers are required to give timely reports to leaders of the organization regarding the progress of planned strategies. Hence it can be stated that while leaders act as thinkers, mangers act as doers of the work in an organizational realm (Epitropaki and Martin, 2004). Discussion Leader as Strategy Designers The strategic thinking and planning activity carried out by leaders are based on different crucial aspects. Few of the same discussed in the current paper are, namely; understanding organizational system of working, learning about strengths and weakness, influence of present and future economic conditions, knowledge the long term organizational visions, assessing stakeholder needs and analysis of competitor position (Centre for Creative Leadership, 2014; Vicere and Fulmer, 1998). Leader’s tasks as strategy designers are extremely crucial. The long term success of the firm lies crucially within the hands of the strategic leaders. They are essentially the decision makers in respect of a firm’s future. Leaders are required to assess the capabilities existing within an organization and accordingly steer it towards the direction of success (Schyns and Meindl, 2005). While performing such analysis a leader is required to think from numerous perspectives. These are essentially, the internal organizational competencies and conditions existing in the external environment. Leaders are required to most importantly assess the systems of working existing within the organization. Leaders in most organizations are required to carry out extensive analysis and therefore there dependency upon data from various departments is immense. In case of internal data, leaders analyse the existing resources, strengths, weaknesses, systems of working and the long term organizational objectives. The internal evaluation facilitates leaders to understand the virtues which must be taken into account while formulating long term plans. It is also essential to ensure that the decisions taken by the organizational leaders aids in achieving a competitive position in the market. Evaluating the strategies of competitors in this respect is necessary. Leaders are also required to assess the future conditions and try to reduce the risks arising out of uncertainty to a large extend. Here the past experience and the knowledge of the leaders play a crucial role (Chen and Lee, 2008). Organizational activities have a crucial impact upon the stakeholders of the firm. Stakeholders are essentially customers, employees, suppliers, financiers and the government. Leaders are often required to communicate with such interests groups and accordingly formulate plans for the future. The task of strategy development is exhaustive and requires crucial analysis of the past, present and future activities of the firm. The success of the organization crucially depends upon the efficiency with which the plans for the future actions are developed (MacNeil, 2006). Managers as implementers While on one hand organizational leaders develop strategic plans after careful evaluation, these plans are implemented and given effect to by the mangers. It is basically the responsibility of the managers to ensure that the decisions taken by the top level authorities and the long term visions of the firm are fulfilled adequately. Managers are an essential link between employees and the top level administrators. They communicate vital information from the top level administrators to the lower level employees (Delmas and Toffel, 2004). Organizational leaders provide essential instructions to the managers in respect of how they are required to guide employees so that the work gets done. Hence employees are directly linked with the managers than the organizational leaders. In order to execute the plans and policies set by leaders, mangers must possess adequate knowledge and tactfully carry out various tasks so that the organizational goals can be fulfilled. Managers are required to be effective negotiators so that they can convince employees to meet the needs set by administrators. The communication and negotiation activities by mangers are also carried out in respect of suppliers, financiers and other external stakeholders. Such interaction is carried out on the basis of the instructions laid down by the leaders (Wang, et al., 2005). Without the contribution of managers, leaders would not be able to implement their strategic plans. Leaders due to their superior position and lack of communication with lower level employees cannot many at times fulfil the roles of administration. Hence a dependency gets created upon the mangers to fulfil the roles and responsibilities arising out of strategic planning. From a wider view point it can be assessed that managers are also decision makers and formulators of strategy at the lower scale of operations. Decisions regarding division of work and allocation of resources at the operational level are generally carried out by the mangers. Since leaders have little knowledge regarding the skills of lower level of employees, the task of allocating work and administering activities at these levels can be effectively carried out by the managers (Carmeli, 2003). Therefore it can be stated that while leadership in the administrative level is more policy formulation oriented, the lower level leadership is more executive in nature. Mangers are required to exercise leadership to a certain extend so as to implement different policies. Since managers directly oversee the work carried out by employees, motivating subordinates and exercising skills to ensure that their efforts are productive is a crucial task for mangers. Mangers are entrusted with the task of creating value out of the resources provided (Avolio and Gardner, 2005). Conflicts between the roles of the management and the administrators are common within an organizational setting. Leaders who are essentially firm’s administrators have lesser knowledge regarding the environment and the conditions existing at the lower executive levels. Hence many at times their plans and policies might not be suitable for the organization from the executive point of view. Since mangers constantly interact with lower level executives their view points are considered to be more productive for the organization. However, many at times the suggestions of managers are ignored by top level leaders, leading to disharmony and conflicts. Leaders must realise that mangers have greater knowledge in respect of lower level operations and therefore taking into consideration their suggestions might be fruitful. Manager roles are mainly associated with implementation of the plans set by superior authorities. Nevertheless, their experience with direct work handling and constant communication with stakeholders enhances their knowledge in respect of industrial conditions. They are also highly aware of the skills and potency existing within the firm. For such reasons leaders must allow mangers to be a part of the decision making process. Also managers must allow employees to have sufficient authority to alter the decisions implemented on the basis of the changing environmental conditions (Gregory Stone, Russell and Patterson, 2004). The role of managers as implementers of strategies formulated by leaders requires high level of skills. Hence administrators must exercise diligence while recruiting managers. Many at times leaders train employees to become future managers. Managers are also seen to evolve as strategic leaders with the passage of time and gaining of knowledge and experience. Individuals who initially have remained as employees and managers before becoming leaders have greater abilities relating to strategic decision making (Srivastava, Bartol and Locke, 2006). Theoretical assessment The trait theory of leadership suggests that leaders have particular qualities which set them apart other employees. These traits are essentially empathy, decision making skills and integrity. Leaders also possess the distinctive abilities of understanding the needs of others and accordingly formulating strategies. Leaders who possess the trait of forward sightedness are seen to be able to develop strategies in a more effective manner. Such traits largely emerge out of the belief system existing within individuals. Therefore it can be effectively stated on the basis of the trait theory that the ability of a leader to formulate successful strategies depends much upon the existence of certain traits. It is the existence of such traits which distinguishes successful leaders from those who are not (Colbert, et al., 2012). The position and authority possessed by leaders is not alone enough for making leaders successful. Those leaders who rely completely upon other members and their competencies to formulate strategies might not evolve as successful leaders. Such leaders lack the potency to themselves understand the needs of the organization and formulate strategies. In the long run such leaders do not contribute effectively towards the growth of the organization. This type of strategy formulation approach is adopted when the leaders of the organization are required to develop plans on a short notice (Northouse, 2012). The age old behavioural theory of leadership is yet another significant example of the fact that leaders are essentially strategy formulators while mangers are required to implement the same. As per the behavioural theory, leaders develop and impose strategies upon subordinates in two mannerisms, namely autocratic and democratic. Autocratic leaders are strict in respect of the strategies developed and impose them firmly upon mangers for implementation. Autocratic leaders spend less time evaluating whether the decisions takes suits the needs of the organization or not (McCormick, 2001). They also consider it less important to involve other employees and managers in the decision making process. Such leaders consider that their word is required to be taken as final and provide less scope for alterations. Democratic leaders on the other hand take strategic decisions on the basis of the suggestions, viewpoints and interests of other member of the organization as well. Democratic leaders are seen to remain more just and gain acceptance easily from all members of the organization. However to formulate strategies by taking the opinion of all teams and members of the organization might not always be feasible for a leader. Especially when the situation is demanding and quick decisions requires being taken. The democratic approach towards strategy formulation is only undertaken when the required policies have severe and long term implications upon the organization. Taking stern and quick decisions under the democratic approach can often be difficult as such leaders only arrive at conclusions after considering all options (DeRue, et al., 2011). The contingency theories are also applicable towards understanding how leaders formulate strategies. According to this concept, leaders must have the ability to be able to judge different situations and develop strategies accordingly. The contingency theory adequately suggests that successful leaders must not follow any particular style based on which strategic policies are required to be framed. They must keep altering their approach towards strategic leadership on the basis of the changes in the needs of the firm. For instance sometimes a leader is required to frame policies on the basis of the needs of the tasks solely while at other times the strategy formulation process is focussed upon the needs of the employees rather than the task. As per the theory of contingency leaders must possess the distinctive ability of being able to assess the situations and accordingly alter their approach (Spillane, Halverson and Diamond, 2004). The above discussed theories are seen to mainly describe the role of mangers are strategy formulators and the manner in which they do so. This essentially proves that leaders irrespective of the type and nature of the organization play a crucial role in developing plans and policies for the future. However the success of strategy formulation can only be stated to be complete if they are effectively implemented in the organizations. Much effort and motivation is required to be exerted on behalf of the leaders to turn strategies into actions. Leaders many at times fail to motivate managers and hence strategies are not correctly understood and followed through. Leaders must ensure that the main objectives and the fundamental requirements associated with strategies are clearly understood and interpreted. Directors of most organizations would state that even though they develop effective strategies very few companies actually are able to achieve success. In order to be able to convert strategies into actions directors must be adequately motivate employees. Leaders must specify the areas which require greater attention and are most crucial to be followed. It is also observed that managers fail to understand the leader’s rationale for choosing different strategies. This mainly arises out of lack of adequate communication between the leaders and the managers. The doubts are also passed on to employees. It is generally observed that when managers have sound knowledge regarding the rationale and the objectives of particular strategies, their implementation efforts are stronger (Liden, Wayne and Sparrowe, 2000). Organizational examples It is generally seen that organizations which are immensely successful are run by a group of leaders possessing high expertise. Firms such as Apple, Microsoft and Google can be stated as suitable examples in this respect. It must be borne in mind that success of a leader adequately depends upon his ability to steer the organization towards success and not his charisma or popularity as a leader (Forbes, 2012). For instance Steve Jobs the former CEO and co-founder of Apple has although been successful to steer the company towards the heights of success has also made a number of mistakes which had tarnished the company’s reputation for a while. One such mistake was the lack of explanations and clarity of goals provided to subordinates. Although Steve was highly visionary and his leadership tactics were rationally directed towards success, many at times he would not consider it necessary to communicate the rationale behind his decisions to employees. Employees many at times would misinterpret and not perform as required (Sanders, 2012). Jobs would expect his employees to blindly follow strategies with fewer questions asked and at the same time deliver exceptional results. Such made Steve infamously known as a bureaucratic leader. On the other hand the many at times Jobs was successful to effectively formulate polices of change and innovation and motivate employees to make such polices a massive success. It can therefore be understood that organizational success radically depends upon the leaders approach towards inspiring and motivating managers (Forbes, 2013). Organizations such as Google have been successful because their leaders do not built walls or discriminate the capabilities of employees. Leaders at Google provide employees with the adequate flexibility of being able to put forth their opinions. As strategy designers, the administrators at Google take into consideration the needs and the opinions of all concerned members of the company (Kark and Van Dijk, 2007). This facilitates the leaders of the organization to suitably gain respect and trust in the eyes of their employees. Strategic leaders also encourage managers operating at lower levels to provide the required inputs so that successful strategies can be formed. This makes managers and subordinates feel important in the organization. Since they are involved in the strategy making process, their dedication towards making those strategies a successful one becomes high. This tactic is seen to be followed by Samsung (Forbes, 2013). Conclusion It is observed many at times that even though a firm possesses effective leaders, their ultimate performance is not satisfactory. The reasons can be attributed to lack of suitable implementation policies. It is also observed that even though there are highly talented managers and employees, the lack of competencies of directors and leaders makes organizations lose their competitiveness. Hence it is only the combination of able leaders and efficient managers which makes an organization successful. Managers must understand and trust the capabilities of their leaders and communicate with them effectively. Similarly leaders must respect the skills of subordinate managers and motivate them to effectively carry out plans of action. It is only on the basis of such mutual understanding and dependency which can lead a firm towards success. Modern organizations find it extremely important to motivate mangers so that the aims of the organization can be achieved. A leader due to his vast experience and knowledge must be knowing that innovating new products on a consistent basis is essential, but employees and managers working at lower levels might not be knowing the importance of such continued innovation and might consider it to be a waste of resources. Under such circumstances, leaders are required to effectively guide mangers and make them understand the rationale of their decisions so that they may contribute effectively towards their implementation. Reference List Avolio, B. J. and Gardner, W. L., 2005. Authentic leadership development: Getting to the root of positive forms of leadership. The leadership quarterly, 16(3), pp. 315-338. Carmeli, A., 2003. The relationship between emotional intelligence and work attitudes, behaviour and outcomes: An examination among senior managers. Journal of managerial Psychology, 18(8), pp. 788-813. Centre for Creative Leadership, 2014. Developing a Leadership Strategy A Critical Ingredient for Organizational Success. [PDF] Centre for Creative Leadership. Available at: [Accessed 12 May 2015]. Chen, C. C. and Lee, Y. T., 2008. Leadership and management in China: Philosophies, theories, and practices. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Colbert, A. E., Judge, T. A., Choi, D. and Wang, G., 2012. Assessing the trait theory of leadership using self and observer ratings of personality: The mediating role of contributions to group success. The Leadership Quarterly, 23(4), pp. 670-685. Delmas, M. and Toffel, M. W., 2004. Stakeholders and environmental management practices: an institutional framework. Business strategy and the Environment, 13(4), pp. 209-222. DeRue, D. S., Nahrgang, J. D., Wellman, N. E. D. and Humphrey, S. E., 2011. Trait and behavioral theories of leadership: An integration and meta‐analytic test of their relative validity. Personnel Psychology, 64(1), pp. 7-52. Epitropaki, O. and Martin, R., 2004. Implicit leadership theories in applied settings: factor structure, generalizability, and stability over time. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89(2), pp. 293. Forbes, 2012. Its Not The CEO, Its The Leadership Strategy That Matters. [online] Available at: [Accessed 4 May 2015]. Forbes, 2013. 8 Leadership Lessons From Apple And Samsung. [online] Available at: [Accessed 4 May 2015]. Gregory Stone, A., Russell, R. F. and Patterson, K., 2004. Transformational versus servant leadership: A difference in leader focus. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 25(4), pp. 349-361. House, R., Javidan, M., Hanges, P. and Dorfman, P., 2002. Understanding cultures and implicit leadership theories across the globe: an introduction to project GLOBE. Journal of world business, 37(1), pp. 3-10. Kark, R. and Van Dijk, D., 2007. Motivation to lead, motivation to follow: The role of the self-regulatory focus in leadership processes. Academy of Management Review, 32(2), pp. 500-528. Liden, R. C., Wayne, S. J. and Sparrowe, R. T., 2000. An examination of the mediating role of psychological empowerment on the relations between the job, interpersonal relationships, and work outcomes. Journal of applied psychology, 85(3), p. 407. MacNeil, C. A., 2006. Bridging generations: Applying “adult” leadership theories to youth leadership development. New Directions for Youth Development, 2006(109), pp. 27-43. McCormick, M. J., 2001. Self-efficacy and leadership effectiveness: Applying social cognitive theory to leadership. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 8(1), pp. 22-33. Northouse, P. G., 2012. Leadership: Theory and practice. London: Sage. Sanders, B., 2012. 8 Unforgivable Leadership Mistakes Steve Jobs Made. [online] Available at: [Accessed 4 May 2015]. Schyns, B. and Meindl, J. R., 2005. An overview of implicit leadership theories and their application in organization practice. Implicit leadership theories: Essays and explorations, 3(1), pp. 15-36. Spillane, J. P., Halverson, R. and Diamond, J. B., 2004. Towards a theory of leadership practice: A distributed perspective. Journal of curriculum studies, 36(1), pp. 3-34. Srivastava, A., Bartol, K. M. and Locke, E. A., 2006. Empowering leadership in management teams: Effects on knowledge sharing, efficacy, and performance. Academy of management journal, 49(6), pp. 1239-1251. Vicere, A.A. and Fulmer, R. M., 1998.  Leadership by Design. Boston: Harvard Business Review. Wang, H., Law, K. S., Hackett, R. D., Wang, D. and Chen, Z. X., 2005. Leader-member exchange as a mediator of the relationship between transformational leadership and followers performance and organizational citizenship behaviour. Academy of management Journal, 48(3), pp. 420-432. Read More