Implementing Strategies in Effective Leadership - Literature review Example

UNIVERSITY OF LEICESTER MBA PROGRAM (Distance Learning) IMPLEMENTING STRATEGIES (MODULE 3) ENGR. ABDULLAH A. AL-QUBAISI (Name of Student) OCTOBER 28, 2006 RIYADH, KINGDOM OF SAUDI ARABIA According to Bennis (1989), leadership is a multifaceted procedure by which an individual affects others to carry out an assignment, task, job, or objective and directs the organization in such a way that it creates it to be unified and rational. An individual performs this by putting into practice the several leadership characteristics specifically, conviction, principles, morals, character, familiarity and abilities. Leadership is a type of "influence relationship among leaders and their associates who intend real changes that reflect their mutual purposes" (Rost, 1993). It is believed that effective leadership depends on the cooperation, or fit, of a leader's values and competencies, those of their associates, and the nature of the leadership challenge or situation (Brown, et al., 1991). In fact, leadership is the result of the relationship between the leader and his subordinates that is a two-way influence behaviour that can only occur in certain situations. In order for leadership to occur, according to (Rost, 1993), such a relationship must be based on influence. Leaders and their associates are the people in the relationship and as they intend real changes they purposefully seek substantive changes; and the changes reflect their mutual purpose. There are numerous strategies that can be adopted in leading a company. For instance, there is a need to maintain the upper hand so that a leader is on top of the situation. The leader can also encourage traditions, customs and systems stimulating the organization to implement various strategies. Likewise, the leader can maintain the organization’s receptiveness to varying conditions. It is important that the team or group is able to adapt to changes internally and externally. Set the leadership principles and put into effect these leadership principles. But most importantly, take remedial action to enhance the general strategic performance of the organization. James C. Collins developed a model of "Level 5 Leadership" which was discussed in detail in Chapter 2 of the "Good to Great" book by Collins (2001). This author believes that good is the enemy of great. The said book discusses leadership, strategic planning, organizational change, technological innovations and management. Specifically, Collins (2001) mentions the Level 5 Leadership which is a model concerning valuing yourself in context of others, instead of evaluating others in your context. The hierarchy of management attributes according to Collins (2001) is clearly illustrated in Table 1 below. There exist a hierarchy of management attributes as expounded by Collins (2001). Level 1 is the Highly Capable Individual who makes productive contributions through talent, knowledge, skills and good work habits. Level 2 is the Contributing Member who contributes individual capabilities to the achievement of group objectives and works effectively with others in a group setting. Level 3 is the Competent Manager who organizes people and resources toward the effective and efficient pursuit of predetermined objectives. Level 4 is the Effective Leader who catalyzes commitment to and vigorous pursuit of a clear and compelling vision, stimulating higher performance standards. Level 5 is the Executive Level who is building enduring greatness through a paradoxical blend of personal humility and professional will. Using this hierarchy as a frame of reference, critical evaluation of my own style of leadership will be demonstrated in this paper through analysis of my strengths and weaknesses within the context of the organization I have worked with consideration to a range of relevant theories and concepts of leadership. It is interesting to note page 21 of the “Good to Great” book by Collins (2001). It reads: “Entrepreneurial success is fuelled by creativity, imagination, bold moves into encharted waters, and visionary zeal. As company grows and becomes more complex, it begins to trip over its own success – too many new people, too many new customers, too many new orders, too many new products. What was once great fun becomes an unwieldy ball of disorganized stuff. Lack of planning, lack of accounting, lack of systems, and lack of hiring constraints create friction. Problems surface – with customers, with cash flow, with schedules.” “The professional managers finally rein in the mess. They create order out of chaos, but they also kill the entrepreneurial spirit. Members of the founding team begin to grumble, "This isn’t fun anymore. I used to be able to just get things done. Now I have to fill out these stupid forms and follow these stupid rules. Worst of all, I have to spend a horrendous amount of time in useless meetings." “Most companies build their bureaucratic rules to manage the small percentage of wrong people on the bus, which in turn drives away the right people on the bus, which then increases the percentage of wrong people on the bus, which increases the need for more bureaucracy to compensate for incompetence and lack of discipline, which then further drives the right people away, and so forth.” It is evident from the above that there are some mistaken concepts in management community (Abbas, 2005). For instance, it is supposed that the leaders merely head and followers go along. This should not be the case since there are a number of other traits that a leader should have aside from just merely taking the lead. Another point is that it it may be ill-advised for a leader to just follow or go along the tide since this is not the attribute of a leader. Many believe that leaders cannot just let loose their authority. These leaders are anticipating that their exhibition of strength will have their subordinates do as they are told. Even if such force works on one occasion or for the time being, in a free civilization, the populace will look for methods to either take a back seat, give up, or rebel. A milder version of the above, that is still not effective, has numerous leaders trying to create followers by attempting to strengthen the message of leadership internally or inside of them. What actually works is the opposite. That is, showing what servitude and concern are. It may be seen that followers emulate similar sort of servitude and concern back to the leader as well as to the clients. This redirection of the idea of servitude and concern of the follower to leader is popular in the management world as transference. Managers should learn to understand and develop appropriate authority relationships. According to Atkins et al. (2006), “it is the key to moving from defensive routine into effective task activity and that the use of this provides with a framework for understanding what is going on without having to "baffle" group members with any of the language”. In anticipation of winning, we all lose. Industry leadership is founded on worth, compassion and generosity. There is business wisdom in elevating and giving power to those who strive to have an upright and distinguished existence if they can manage it. There can be harmony between making money work for strengthening demoralized civilizations, and eventually making the shareholders wealthier in the process which is of importance. It is pertinent since money covers only a certain portion of the society financial contributions. Good can be done beyond the range of money. This is corporate social responsibility or welfare economics on a macro-economic level, however, it is not calculated logically by the system, and therefore, underplayed by majority of the commerce management leaders as an elective exercise. By making the unquantifiable quantifiable, the foundation for more commerce leaders to expend resources willingly can almost certainly be shaped. It is the social responsibility of leader to wisely expend resources. This will help to guarantee the organization's future. Likewise, “for-money-and-beyond-money” is a money-making undertakings that labour around the clock on elevating the economic status of the community. The leaders can generate this situation. Simply put, similar thing that presently is not worth the money will become financially worthy to practice as the attempt of quantifying intangibles creates other financial aspects accessible to be utilized for a profit. This “for-money-and-beyond-money” leadership is significant because it harmonized that our central motto worked in the actual business environment. That is, as a part of building up the infrastructure for quantifying intangibles, varied specialists from the different walks of life from a variety social environments and contributing from diverse geological parts of the world can be joined together through the conduct of the concerted knowledge round-tables. My own style of leadership focuses on character, traits, and variables in relationships. Using the hierarchy in Table 1 as a frame of reference, a number of points can be raised. In the Collins’ (2001) Level 1 which is a Highly Capable Individual who "makes productive contributions through talent, knowledge, skills and good work habits." In my own style of leadership, beneficial inputs of a highly capable individual are made possible through widely acceptable character, traits and variables in relationships such as leadership style, skill level, qualities of the followers. These beneficial inputs are critical factors in the achievement of goals in an organization As mentioned above, Level 2 is a Contributing Team Member who "contributes individual capabilities to the achievement of group objectives and works effectively with others in a group setting." Strength of character and good traits and individual capabilities contribute to the achievement of the objectives and efficient collaboration in a team. In contrast, inability to work with others may result to not meeting the aims of the group. Poor interpersonal skills can ruin what is supposed to be successful communication within a group. Collaboration values diversity because it values diverse skills and experience, and it does so in an environment of equality. Members of a team may have different skills but equal responsibility for group success. The Competent Manager, Collins’s third level, who "organizes people and resources toward the effective and efficient pursuit of predetermined objectives." A competent manager manages people who have the skills and drive to become the best that they can be as well as efficiently utilizes resources needed in the organization to pursue the aims of the organization. Competent manager can make these people maintain their jobs in the organization and be fulfilled. Level 4 is an Effective Leader who "catalyzes commitment to and vigorous pursuit of a clear and compelling vision, stimulating higher performance standards." In my own style of leadership, triumphs of an efficient leader exemplify achievements at the efficient degree, elevated performance standards with good results. An efficient leader may use the types of multifaceted, sustainable improvements executed by executive leaders, who create the situations for lasting vastness (Fullan, 2002). Collins’ (2001) Level 5 is the Executive who "builds enduring greatness through a paradoxical blend of personal humility and professional will." Personal humility and professional will (Table 2) are the attributes that have been highly praised as an exceptional personal special asset and should carry on to be a obligatory prerequisite for any person assuming a leadership position (Collin, 2001). A leader necessitates to stay concentrated on all the events that are happening inside their firm and understand the acts that must be completed to reinforce the firm's market positioning. According to Collins' (2001) in the book, “Good to Great”, ”to build enduring greatness requires a level 5 executive, whose ambition is for the institution and not for himself”. This fit my style of leadership since my own style of leadership is not motivated by my own individual attainment. My aspiration is for the organization I work for. I am working efficiently and effectively for my institution because I believe that this institution can be one of the best in its field. This drive to lead the workforce to the best of my ability will inspire me and my subordinates to get to the top using all available opportunities and resources. This, I believe is the secret for enduring greatness However, there are two sides of Level 5 Leadership as illustrated by Collins (2001), “the professional will and the personal humility. In the professional will, the leader creates superb results, a clear catalyst in the transition from good to great. In here, the leader demonstrates an unwavering resolve to do whatever must be done to produce the best long-term results, no matter how difficult. The leader sets the standard of building an enduring great company; will settle for nothing less. And lastly, in the professional will, the leader looks in the mirror, not out the window, to apportion responsibility for poor results, never blaming other people, external factors, or bad luck. On the other hand, the other side of the Level 5 leadership is the personal humility. The leader demonstrates a compelling modesty, shunning public adulation; never boastful. The leader also acts with quiet, calm determination; relies principally on inspired standards, not inspiring charisma, to motivate. This leader channels ambition into the company, not the self; sets up successors for even greater success in the next generation. And lastly, in the personal will side of the Level 5 Leadership, the leader looks out the window, not in the mirror, to apportion credit for the success of the company—to other people, external factors, and good luck. Overall, my own style of leadership based on character, traits and variables in relationships is typified an inner constancy between principles and performance and an exceptional substance of power to motivate and contributing to the advancement of others. Managers can ensnare themselves into an array of convictions that are dysfunctional but self-confirming (Welch, 2006). McGregor (1960) described two distinctly different sets of managerial beliefs. According to the managerial beliefs by McGregor, there are Theory X and Theory Y. Theory X states that: 1. The average human being has an inherent dislike of work and will avoid it if he can. 2. Most people need to be coerced, controlled, directed, threatened with punishment to get them to put forth adequate effort toward the achievement of organizational objectives. 3. The average human being prefers to be directed, wishes to avoid responsibility, has relatively little ambition, wants security above all. On the other hand, Theory Y states that: 1. The expenditure of physical and mental effort in work is as natural as play or rest. 2. People will exercise self-direction and self-control in the service of objectives to which they are committed. 3. Commitment to objectives is a function of the rewards associated with their achievement. 4. The average human being learns under proper conditions not only to accept but to seek responsibility. Theory X and Theory Y describe two opposing views of people at work that will influence management style. Managers can be said to follow either view of their workforce. That is, Theory X is often said to describe a traditional view of direction and control. On the other hand, Theory Y implies a more self directed workforce that takes an interest in the goals of their organisation and integrates some of their own goals into these (McGregor, 1960). The idea of "theory" can be observed as a set of beliefs. These set of beliefs have been resulted from methodical study. These beliefs are likely direct an individual’s performance. Likewise, managers utilize theory to hone their performance in connection to components of a group. The soundness of numerous beliefs depends upon the conditions. Also, the theories of a manager are most helpful when they are open to the eventualities of the situation. The quality of character and its connection to leaders has also taken on enlarged meaning in the current years. Hillman (1996) describes the character as the "invisible source of personal consistency”. Character is the profound organizations of traits that are specifically resilient to transformation." (p. 260). Study on leadership embraces numerous inventories of character attributes as practiced by leaders (Spears, 2002). Bennis (1989) recognizes "vision, motivation, empathy and reliability" as important qualities of effective leaders. (p. 140). Majority of the literatures on leadership take into consideration as an implied supposition the conviction that affirmative traits can and should be promoted and practiced by the leaders. On the other hand, Greenleaf (1977) mentions that a leader exhibits servant-leadership and character. Functions are essential channels for providing order and consistency to a person's performance in a community system. These roles frequently operate as a foundation of support for an individual's essential feeling of competence. Individual get their feeling of competence by accomplishing the things at which they are proficient and by learning to be competent at the things they give better importance. In cases when people experience triumph in some endeavours, they enhance their feeling of competence and substantiate their idea of themselves as competent. Intuition is important in leadership. It is more of an attribute rather than a learned skill. According to Kerfoot (2003), “trait theory describes individual leaders as people who have specific characteristics that help or enable the person to be a good leader. While the great man theory implies that people are somehow endowed with some essence of leadership, trait theory provides a base for measurable and testable characteristics such as virtues, race, gender, height, appearance, psychological factors, efficacy factors, cognitive factors, and emotional factors to name a few categories”. As Bass and Stogdill (1990) mention “the focus of both the great man theory and trait theory is on the individual”. The strengths and weaknesses within the context of an organization in which I have worked were critically evaluated. In the organization I have worked with, leaders can obtain a jump ahead of most leadership appraisals by measuring performance efficiency and growth development of individual leaders inside the framework of a company’s leadership system. As a whole, the analyses employed in this study were extracted from a variety of other philosophies and concepts of leadership that have been scrutinized in order to generate methodical evaluation of both the approach and the worth of Collins’ model. That is, using the Level 5 Leadership by Collins (2001) as a frame of reference, critical evaluation of my own style of leadership showed that by effectively and efficiently considering my strengths and weaknesses and harnessing the capabilities of the workforce to the best of my ability would result to outstanding performance and high impact indicators. That my conclusions from the investigation conducted may be summarised as enduring greatness is achievable and further inspire the leader as well as the subordinates to get to the top using all available opportunities and resources. BIBLIOGRAPHY Ali, Abbas J. 2005. Bad management theories: mistaken conclusion. Advances in Competitiveness Research. American Society for Competitiveness. Atkins, Howard, Kellner, Kamil and Linklater, Jane. 2006. Action Learning: Employing the Workplace Within. http://www.sba.oakland.edu/ispso/html/atkins.html. Bass, B. M., and Stogdill, D. 1990. The handbook of leadership. New York: The Free Press. Bennis, W. 1989. On Becoming a Leader. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley Publishing Company Inc. Brown, D. E., Ledford, Jr., G. E., & Nathan, B. R. 1991. Hiring for the organization, not the job. Academy of Management Executive, 5 (4), 35-51. Collins, James C. 2001. Good to Great: Why Why Some Companies Make the Leap…And Others Don’t. 1st ed. New York: HarperCollins Publishers, Inc. p. 20-21. Collins, James C. and Porras, Jerry I. 1994. Built to Last: Successful Habits of Visionary Companies. Harper Business: New York. pp. 190, 198, 200. Fullan, Michael. 2002. The Chance Leader. Center for Development and Learning. Greenleaf, R.K. 1977. Servant-Leadership: A Journey Into the Nature of Legitimate Power and Greatness. Mahwah, NJ: Paulist Press. Hillman, J. 1996. The Soul's Code: In Search of Character and Calling. New York: Random House. Jordan, Ann T. 2003. Business Anthropology. Waveland Press: Prospect Heights, IL Kerfoot, K. 2003. Learning intuition--less college and more kindergarten: The leader's challenge. (On Leadership). Dermatology Nursing, 15(6), 567-569. McGregor, Douglas. 1960. The Human Side of Enterprise. Rost, J. C. (Ed.). 1993. Leadership for the twenty-first century. Westport, CT: Praeger. Spears, Larry C. 2002. On Character and Servant-Leadership: Ten Characteristics of Effective, Caring Leaders. The Robert K Greenleaf Center for Servant Leadership Welch, Jack. 2006. Understanding the Individual: The Personal System. Notes on Understanding Individual Behaviour. CBA. What Level are you 1,2,3, 4 or 5?. 2006. Jimcollins.com. Jim Collins. http://www.jimcollins.com. ********** END ********** Read More