Organizational Leadership - Literature review Example

Organizational Leadership Name Institution Date Organizational Leadership Introduction Proper and effective leadership in organizations has been known to bring about positive outcomes. This, however, is a great challenge to many organizations, especially the complex organizations. Menzel and White (2011) defined complexity of organizations, indicating how effective management of strategies, structures and other complex adaptive systems is crucial for orboutganizational survival. Researchers have emphasized the value of leadership in organizations, indicating how valuable this is to prosperity of organizations, both global as well as dynamic ones. Leadership characteristics are thus crucial in sustaining the competitive advantage in dynamic environment. Effective management of organizations is thus a critical issue and the primary concern of administrators. The roles and responsibilities of administrators in complex organizations are hence immense. This paper serves to insightfully discuss issues pertinent to leadership in complex organizations, including the roles and responsibilities of administrators in such organizations. Administrators in complex organizations According to Denhardt (2010), power is often a critical factor in complex organizations. The result of power distribution within a complex organization is selection and determination of tenure of people in main administrative positions. Since it influences the decisions made by an organization, power influences the decision on individuals to be placed in various administrative positions. The designation of formal leaders, according to Pfeffer and Salancik (2003), is an obvious method of institutionalizing organizational power. As such, it is always assumed that failures and difficulties faced by an organization are as a result of the administrator. Visible failure goes further to questioning the administrator’s competency and even removing them, disregarding the fact that the administrators might have not been actually involved in the failure (Menzel & White2011). Though different individuals lead in different ways, good administrators often have common values which they share, including motivation for success, organizing ability, ability to create the shared visions, have drive as well as determination, ability of solving problems and the all-valuable ability of decision making, as stated in Steeves (2010). However, having right attributes and courage in decision making does not necessary imply that all the duty has been performed. Bennis (2007) claims that administrators are expected to have their own processes of making decisions that consider the network of communication, the staff, as well as the stakeholders. Some steps crucial in incorporating such elements in to the process are thus fundamental. Even though such steps may be designed distinctly, they entail issues like thorough research of a situation, analyzing of every component, considerations on people affected by the decision. In addition, Covey (2004) claims that such steps may also entail thought process that is both innovative as well as strategic, self-confidence in making long as well as short term decisions, courage to stand by the decision, communication to staff, ability to handle the decision-related conflicts, and effective evaluation strategies. Leadership in complex organizations is difficult, demanding and one that often requires numerous inputs, especially from the administrators in the organization. According to Uhl-Bien & Marion (2008), the escalating global environment complexity has significantly transformed what leadership entails. Such situations have resulted in failure of the highly sophisticated planning tools to explain the non-linear as well as the frequently chaotic ways in which various issues, along with eventualities, occur. The reasons why organizations as well as markets frequently behave in unanticipated ways as well as why organizational structures may be assets or liabilities, are intriguing factor considered by administrators. Along with these, the administrators try to solve issues regarding the reason why some given patterns matter where as others do not, and better method of understanding the operating environment during occasions of uncertainty so as to regain the assurance (Riccucci, 2010). Effective administrators are thus a necessity in every complex organization, as they are primary in organizing people as well as resources so as to ensure optimal creativity, adaptableness, flexibility and the organizational learning capacity. Even though leadership styles exist, Naidu (2005) states that none can be termed as appropriate, inappropriate, or excellent in all situations. An effective approach in complex organizations, however, often majorly depends on the skill levels as well as experience of the organizational members, work type, and organizational environment (stable, radically changing, adventurous or even conservative). In practice, any good administrator switches instinctively from one style to the next according to work type dealt with and the people being handled, as stated in Denhardt (2009). Effective management of a complex organization generally requires the administrators to engage in planning, controlling, leading, as well as organizing the resources. These procedures are also carried out on the efforts of the organization’s members, with the main purpose of achieving the goals of the organization. The decisions, whether big or small, are made by the administrators on a daily basis, hence for an effective organization; the administrators are compelled to come up with decisions beneficial to the overall organization. Such effective decisions are not generated by the administrators alone but rather in addition with the inputs from other organizational members (Chun & Fadzlina, 2007). Decision Making Since leadership is the greatest valued resource in a complex organization, wastage in leadership is often avoided and careful stewardship is ensured. Paradoxically, this suggests that leadership itself must be managed since it is the chief system component. Thus in organizational improvement, improving the leadership practice and responsibility is quite crucial and more different from personal development among the individual leaders. The administrators are charged with the roles of planning, organizing, staffing, directing, controlling and budgeting. Administrators often occupy formal functions in organizations, charged with responsibility of getting things done profitably through resources and individuals. They thus can be equated to investors, although they are as well catalysts, nurturers, trainers and facilitators of individuals (Roussel & Swansburg, 2006). The old fashioned notion that the administrators are mechanically controlling therefore is inapplicable, considering that they, just as investors, seek to attain the best returns from all the resources invested. Successful directors have been known not to monopolize leadership basing on the fact that no individual has monopoly on better ideas. While performing their responsibilities, the administrators are expected to make better decisions. Their influence in issues regarding decision making is thus immense (Denhardt & Vinzant, (2006). Decisions made may vary widely and may sometimes be poor or better, fail to be made or be made quite late. Other decisions may be termed as great as they are right when made, timely and have continuous positive results. Making clear choices are supposed to give the organization competitive edges, apart from enabling the organization realize its aims and objectives. A model for making decisions is not only beneficial to administrators, but as well necessary for realization of success in the organization. According to Helton & Saltsman (2005), decision models working easily each time provide the much needed competitiveness. Some decision- making models, as used in public administration, include Niskanen’s budget-maximizing model and bureau-shaping model (developed by Dunleavy and a modification of the Niskanen’s model).The decisions, however, are made in line with what the organization supports and approves. In as much as the administrators have greater influence in creation as well as monitoring of the organizational decision making structures as well as processes, there have been varying opinions with regards to policy and administration. Policy and administration have often been perceived as separate entities by academicians as well as practitioners hence the administrators have been sometimes perceived as having limited role in policy making. Contrarily however, administrators are practically great policy actors influencing the process of making policies in various ways, mostly in the exercise of the administrative discretion. Administrators continuously lay down rules applicable in future while also determining the law as well as its implications. Apart from these, the administrators influence policy mainly through the recommendations they provide. In reaching their desired choice, however, various administrators have been known to employ various decision making methods while discharging their duties and responsibilities, depending on the laid down structures in the organization, the working context and the size of the organization (Kouzes & Posner, 2002). Administrators employing the use of authoritative style of decision making often find it necessary when they have all the relevant information coupled with the fundamental expertise of making best decisions. In such cases, the administrators often make decisions after which the subordinates get informed about the decision. Those using this kind of decision-making style are often experts and use this when there is need for a quick decision. They also have sole responsibility for such decisions. Authoritative decision making is associated with producing decisions effective in getting things done. Such results, however, are often short lived except where there is perceived legitimacy concerning the decisions. This kind of style is however least useful where expertise can be attained from elsewhere for better decision making, or where it is employed as the only style of decision making by the power hungry individuals. Incase such a decision making style turns to be the default, it results in serious problems. As such therefore, in any particular situation, the administrators have to ensure they have a variety of strategies from which they can select (Husemann, 2006). Facilitative style of decision making on the other hand highlights joint effort between the administrators and their subordinates, all providing the inputs for shared decision. In such circumstances, the subordinates are often entitled to accessing the information relevant in decision making. The subordinates also have some given levels of expertise and motivation for ensuring the making of best decision. While this decision making style is in use, the subordinates and the administrators share the responsibility accompanying the decision. This style is often very empowering to the subordinates, contrary to authoritative decision making style having an opposite effect. Administrators find this style is quite beneficial where risks related to poor decisions are limited while benefits related to subordinates are great, for instance arranging timetables and benefit programs. Administrators using consultative style of making decisions request for advice as well as opinions from the subordinates. However, they make decisions by themselves. Just as in the case of the authoritative style of decision making, the administrators retain the responsibility related to this decision. The wise administrators often ask information from the subordinates possessing expertise or any information helpful in making decisions. This decision making style, however, may create disappointment where subordinates have no understanding of its occurrence. Concerning the delegate style of decision making, as is suggested by the name, the administrators often hand over the responsibility of making decisions as well as the decisions to particular subordinates. The advantages and disadvantages of this style are both determined by expertise as well as knowledge of individuals involved in decision making. This style often develops with the enlargement of the organization, implying that the administrator may not be forced to make every decision. The bottom line in relation to these styles, however, is that good administrators vary their styles depending on the context. This, however, requires certain levels of self awareness, and a clear understanding of limits of expertise, so that flexibility can be fully experienced (Achouri, 2010). Despite their immense role in decision making, effective administrators do not only base their strengths and influence on decision-making. In as much as the influence of the administrators lie heavily on creating as well as monitoring the decision-making process, there influence can be more enhanced when they also participate in carrying out the decision. As such, actions of the administrators are quite fundamental in enabling effective adoption of the decisions. Administrators, thus, should borrow from Martin Luther King whose demonstrations led to unconstitutioning of segregation and elicited action from a given public organization where he did not have any formal authority. Successful administrators in the modern times may, for instance, find Bottom-up leadership immensely beneficial as it does not entail watching over the followers, formally or even informally (Bolman & Deal, 2003). Basically, leadership in organizations has often been associated with the making of good decisions. Likewise, the administrators are often effectively authorized by individuals to make various decisions for them, and as natural, the individuals expect wise decisions to be made. These same decisions are to serve the interests of the individuals and the organization. This decision making focus, however, gives a narrow leadership concept that emphasizes on heading a group, where the decisions might also sometimes be ineffective. The main point is that administrators need to show the way, ranging from a simple setting of examples to an aggressive challenge of their status-quo. The influence that can be attained form such an action can be more than simply making the structures of decision. Association of leadership with making of decisions only restricts the vital concept to individuals with authority over others, hence disempowering others (Kettl & Fessler, 2009). Administrators therefore not only need to make decision structures, but also make these decisions with inputs from the subordinates and other relevant parties, ensure cooperation from them, and practically lead in carrying out the decisions. They can have a significant influence if they undertake various activities supporting their aims, the goals of the organization, the procedures of the organization, their positions. Effective administrators should also base the decisions they make on evidence, directly calling for solid knowledge rather than opinions, hence valuing content over the style and ridding themselves of the outdated concepts as well as theories (Greenleaf, 2006). Conclusion Organizations are often faced with challenges regarding leadership and thus have gone far to engage subordinates. Complex organizations are often driven by the passion to develop better decisions that are effective in enabling the organizations achieve a competitive edge over other competitors. Such organizations base their primary activities and competitive edge on the decisions made by the administrators. As such, the administrators are responsible for overcoming resistance, adopting innovative techniques, and ensuring efficient techniques of management so as to perform highly. In addition to this, the administrators have responsibility of enhancing personal, team, as well as cultural skills of management they possess. Overwhelmingly, the current wisdom in relation to management touts the basic goal of making decisions while involving the organizations right from the lowest organizational levels. Basic idea here is that because the subordinates closest to work often seem to know much concerning solutions to problems in their work, it is crucial to include them in decisions regarding their areas. The administrators as well have alternatives while making decisions, and have to ensure cooperation from other organizational members, including the subordinates, the superiors and others people relevant in their activities. Reference Denhardt, R. (2010).Theories of Public Organization. New York: Cengage Learning. Steeves, R. (2010) . Breaking the Leadership Mold: An Executive's Guide to Achieving Organizational Excellence. New York: Wiley and Sons. Achouri, C. (2010). Modern Systemic Leadership: A Holistic Approach for Managers, Coaches, and HR Professionals. New York: Wiley and Sons. Uhl-Bien, M. & Marion, R. (2008). Complexity leadership. New York: IAP. Kettl, D. & Fessler, J. (2009). The Politics of the Administrative Process. Washington D.C.: CQ Press. Menzel, D. & White, H. (2011). The State of Public Administration: Issues, Challenges and Opportunity. New York: M. E. Sharpe. Covey, S. R. (2004). The 8th habit: From effectiveness to greatness. New York: Simon & Schuster. Chun, H. & Fadzlina, N. (2007). Principles of Public Administration: An Introduction. Kuala Lumpur: Karisma Publications Naidu, S.(2005). Public Administration: Concepts And Theories. New Age International, New Delhi. Greenleaf, R. K. (2006). Servant leadership: A journey into the nature of legitimate power and greatness. Mahwah, NJ: Paulist Press. Kouzes, J. M. & Posner, B. Z. (2002). The leadership challenge (3rd ed.). San Francisco: Jossey- Bass. Riccucci, N. (2010). Public Administration: Traditions of Inquiry and Philosophies of Knowledge Washington. DC: Georgetown University Press. Bolman, L. G., & Deal, T. (2003). Reframing organizations: Artistry, choice, and leadership. San Francisco: Pfeiffer. Pfeffer, J. & Salancik, G. (2003). The external control of organizations: a resource dependence perspective. New York: Stanford University Press. Bennis, W. G. (2007). An invented life: Reflections on leadership and change. New York: Basic Books. Denhardt, J. (2009). Public Administration: An Action Orientation. Belmont CA : Thomson Wadsworth. Denhardt , R. & Vinzant, J. (2006). "The New Public Service: Serving Rather than Steering." Public Administration Review 60(6) Helton, K. & Saltsman, G. (2005). An administrator’s guide to online education. Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing, Inc. Husemann, A. (2006). Factors affecting leadership longevity among chief administrators of private Christian schools. New York: ProQuest. Roussel, L. & Swansburg, R. (2006). Management and leadership for nurse administrators. New York: Jones & Bartlett Learning. Read More