Leadership Culture and Ethics - Literature review Example

Lеаdеrshiр culture and еthiсs Name Institution Lеаdеrshiр culture and еthiсs Introduction Leadership can be defined as the art of getting something done by others or the ability to influence other people and teams to work towards a given goal. Leadership is a crucial management aspect especially in organizations. The success of any organization largely depends on its leadership. For this reason, it is important for a firm to invest in effective leadership as a way of enhancing its performance and overall success. There are different leadership styles that can be adopted by leaders, each having its own fair share of benefits and drawbacks. Some of the common leadership styles include the following; participative leadership autocratic leadership, transformational leadership and transactional leadership among others. Personal traits could also influence one’s leadership. Different companies and organizations support different leadership styles depending on what they believe in. Also, depending on an individual, people may choose to exercise a certain style of leadership over the other depending on how effective they find it to be (Northouse, 2012). All in all, it is advisable that all leaders strive towards bringing the best of every party in an organization for overall organizational success to be realized. This piece of work will give an in-depth discussion on the concept of leadership and various aspects associated with it. It will however take a compare and contrast style whereby two leaders (Steve Jobs and Mahatma Gandhi) will be compared and contrasted. The basic factors of comparison will be inclined to their leadership styles and organizational impact based on aspects such as culture and ethics. It is from the discussion that meaningful conclusions will be drawn. Literature review: The two leaders and how they compare This section of the paper will involve a comparison and critical appraisal of Steve Jobs and Mahatma Gandhi with regard to their leadership styles and organizational impact. To begin with, it is appropriate to have some background information on these two leaders to have a better understanding with regard to their lives as leaders. Bel (2010) asserts that Steve Jobs was an American inventor, businessman and entrepreneur born in 1955 and died in 2011. In addition to being the chairman and co-founder of other companies such as NeXt and Pixar, he is well remembered as the co-founder, chief executive officer and chairman of Apple Inc. On the other hand, Mahatma Gandhi was born in 1869 and died in 1948 after being assassinated. He acted as the superlative leader of the Indian Independence movement when India was ruled by the British. He was in a position to lead India to independence by exercising nonviolent civil disobedience (Dalton, 2012). He is also remembered for inspiring movements for civil rights as well as freedom in different parts of the world. With regard to leadership, Steve Jobs and Mahatma Gandhi were in a position to attain a good level of success in their struggle for achieving their life and career goals and objectives. They both had passion in inspiring and motivating others as a way of ensuring that things are done. Steve Jobs and Mahatma Gandhi had different life and career objectives but their leadership styles show some similarities. While Steve was mainly involved in the constant but aggressive creativity and innovation of goods and services, Gandhi’s major objective was to gain India’s independence as well as equality and freedom of the citizens therein. Barnabas and Clifford (2012) assert that Gandhi strived to inspire and motivate the masses in India as a way of gaining their support and achieving his objective. He saw a possibility in every individual and depicted that even a common man has the power to make a difference with regard to bringing the British Empire down. Some of the major principles of Ghandi were self-reliance and lack of cooperation to the British Autocracy, and through this, he was in a position to accomplish a lot. Ghandi believed in positive conflict as a tool towards change. For instance, he was involved in the organization of a number of peaceful marches and protests in the search of what he believed in. He also used the principle of civil disobedience to challenge the British leadership. In his leadership, Gandhi clearly showed that change could be attained through peaceful protests and that chaos and anarchy were not the way to go. This made him gain considerable support from the people as they all saw the need to fight for their liberation, in a peaceful manner. Similarly, Steve Jobs believed in inspiring people as a way of making them work harder and better. At Apple Inc, Steve motivated the employees to work tirelessly and ensure that they came out with the best product for the company. To most of the chief executive officers in the company, Steve acted as their motivation and inspiration, an aspect that made the company to progress day by day. He believed in thinking differently and working towards the achievement of set goals and objectives. Steve is known for his desire to come up with products that had a touch of art as well as technology. Intuitiveness and appropriate design were also some of the attributes he preached (Bel, 2010). As opposed to some leaders, Steve was open to correction and inspirations from others, an aspect that not only sharpened him but also made it possible to inspire others and make positive impact. According to Rast III Hogg and Giessner (2013), both Steve and Gandhi exhibited credibility in their work as leaders, an aspect that is quite crucial when it comes to attaining success through built trust. Ethics dictates that leaders should be credible. Steve was secretive in his undertakings and did not give a lot of information to the public. This is a strategy that works towards creating curiosity and surprise and in turn adding up to credibility. The fact that he was used to honouring his promises was a plus on Steve’s leadership as it made it possible for people to trust him and expect rewarding things from him even in the future. Conversely, Gandhi is also linked to great credibility. The Indian people recognized Gandhi as a great leader as it was seen in his previous work and movements in South Africa. His use of peaceful methods to achieve his objectives also attracted the attention and favour from many. Another strong point liked to Ghandi is leading by example whereby he acted as a slave for the Indian society and worked towards empowering the general public. He also made a point of honouring his promises. Gandhi lowered himself to the level of the common man and lived a poor and simple life. This made it easy for the people to associate with him as one of their own, a person who understood what they were going through. Steve and Ghandi took advantage of their leadership style to make things work through good relationships with those they led. This works towards attaining success. On aspects of culture such as religion, class and beliefs, Ghandi was in a position to relate well with individuals of different calibre, building powerful and useful relationships through his humility and simplicity. Steve was also a simple man and delighted in building relationships with all workers, irrespective of his position in the company (Dickson, Castaño, Magomaeva & Den Hartog, 2012). This is a positive aspect that helps in understanding things at the basic levels and hence coming up with strategies to handle them effectively. Another essential point in comparing the two leaders is their focus. They were both visionary in nature. Steve is widely remembered for his stubborn and perfectionist approach whereby he believed that all things can be done right through hard work. This is one aspect that is largely attributed to his success in executing his vision which entailed making the best and most original goods in the world. He could not be swayed by the adverse market conditions and other challenges that businesses face on a day to day basis. As a result of believing in making it in life despite the situations, Steve would envisage a new product and know how it would look like and perform way before it was produced. This is a strong point of a leader. With regard to Gandhi, he is well known for being self confident, his desire to uphold righteousness and his long term vision. It is possible that he envisioned freedom for his people quite long before India got independence from the British colony. Due to the persistence, it finally came to pass (Puccio, Mance & Murdock, 2010).They both believed in themselves and knew that they had a responsibility to fulfil; Gandhi to liberate the Indians and Steve to grow and expand Apple Inc through constant innovation of new products. Despite sharing some similarities in the manner in which they did things, Steve and Ghandi also had some differences with respect to culture, vision and objectives. While Steve depicted an authoritative leadership style and focused more on his perfectionist quality, Gandhi was more of a servant leader and relied on massive civil disobedience. Gandhi was a more people-person and a great communicator who interacted with all people irrespective of class (Barnabas & Clifford, 2012). On the other hand, Steve hardly interacted with the public but was rather more into perfecting the production of new products. While Gandhi believed in love for all, Steve did not show any emotions towards his workers but only demonstrated great passion in the production of the best products and the fulfilment of his vision. All in all, it seems that they shared most leadership qualities. Method of research There are various methods of research that could be utilized in studies based on different factors. The methods yield different results depending on the approaches utilized. Primary research entails original research that is meant at collecting data specifically for a current objective. For instance, one could decide to observe behaviour conduct a survey, do an experiment, or even run an interview. In other words, the researcher is involved in the direct collection of the raw data, which is specifically meant for the current research need. On the other hand, secondary research entails searching for already existing data on a given topic. Here, primary research is analyzed and interpreted. A good example of where to find this includes libraries and databases, journals and other online sources (Smith, 2015). Despite the fact that that data was not originally collected for the current research, what is found out is applied to the personal research problem and deductions made. For the purposes of this paper, secondary research will be utilized. Published information such as books and peer-reviewed journals will make up the biggest part of the sources. It is also worth noting that the research will be more qualitative than quantitative since the information will not be in numerical form. It is exploratory in nature. Information obtained will then be analyzed as a way of gaining a better understanding of the issue of concern. In this case, it will entail the comparison in the leadership styles of Steve Jobs and Mahatma Ghandi. Data analysis Information gathered for the topic in question is crucial in drawing some inferences and coming up with informed conclusions on the same. From the research, it is clear that some factors and aspects are quite crucial when it comes to determining the success level of a given leader and their leadership styles. For instance, Steve and Gandhi understood that coming down to the levels of those they lead and abolishing segregation between the leaders and the subordinates is quite essential is gaining loyalty as well as commitment of their people. As a leader, one should strive towards ensuring that employees or followers are comfortable and not in any way intimidated. This allows them to work freely and exploit their creativity and potential in the best way possible. The visionary attitude exhibited by both Steve Jobs and Mahatma Gandhi is a strong point that every leader ought to have (Puccio, Mance & Murdock, 2010). This is more so because it ensures that things come to pass and are done right irrespective of the circumstances. It allows persistence that eventually breeds success, an aspect that is quite crucial especially in the business environment. It allows for healthy competition. The leadership skills that the two leaders portrayed are worth noting especially with regard with how they contributed to their leadership success as well as the organizational impact associated with them. Steve was an unconventional leader and it is not easy to categorize him to a specific leadership style. Some of his characteristics are that he was a cold and demanding leader, a risk taker, visionary, a strong corporate culture builder, a perfectionist and controlling leader among others (Isaacson, 2012). All these traits have their positive and negative side, depending on how they are executed. A leader may use them for his people’s favour or to oppress them. On the part of Gandhi, he portrayed many leadership skills, most of them being positive in nature. He was simple, modest and humble, an aspect that made it easy to associate and influence the common man to achieve his objectives and conquer the British Empire. To fight and conquer the many battles that Gandhi faced, he had to demonstrate courage and bravery in all he engaged in. Without this, it would have been difficult or even impossible to face the British Autocracy. Through his transformational leadership style, Gandhi also did everything meant at motivating the lower class people as a way of empowering them and doing away with the problem of segregation (Pieterse, Van Knippenberg, Schippers & Stam, 2010). This made his change influential. Other characteristics include strong self-control, exercising power for the benefit of others, and being less egoistic among others. The discussion of the two leaders including their similarities and differences is an insight to the fact that leadership is an aspect that is surrounded by different issues. It requires some skills to be successful. Also it is clear that different leaders could use various approaches to achieve their objectives and there are no stipulated standards that ought to be observed. Conclusion From the above discussion, it is apparent that although leaders share most characteristics in their roles, they also differ in some ways. For instance, while Steve Jobs seem to lean more on the authoritarian leadership style, Mahatma Gandhi is more inclined to servant leadership and transformational leadership styles whereby he made use of massive civil disobedience tactics to achieve his objectives. It is also evident that different leadership styles yield different results and have varying organizational impacts. Various tactics are used to achieve different objectives. Generally, Steve and Gandhi were in a position to attain a great level of success in their leadership period through their philosophies and principles as discussed in the paper. This is amidst their strengths and shortcoming. Leaders should take advantage of their strengths to make positive impact and influence others towards the achievement of the desired goals and objectives. Gaining trust and credibility is one of the essential aspects that greatly contribute to success All in all, it is advisable for individuals and organizations to choose leadership styles that are most suitable for them. Since each style has some benefits and drawbacks, it is good to maximize on the advantages while at the same time implementing strategies that are meant at dealing with the disadvantages in an effective manner. This will enhance personal performance of the leaders as well as that of the organizations or groups involved. References Barnabas, A., & Clifford, P. S. (2012). Mahatma Gandhi–an Indian model of servant leadership. International Journal of Leadership Studies, 7(2), 132-150. Bel, R. (2010). Leadership and innovation: Learning from the best. Global business and organizational excellence, 29(2), 47-60. Dalton, D. (2012). Mahatma Gandhi: Nonviolent power in action. Columbia: Columbia University Press. Dickson, M. W., Castaño, N., Magomaeva, A., & Den Hartog, D. N. (2012). Conceptualizing leadership across cultures. Journal of World Business, 47(4), 483-492. Isaacson, W. (2012). The real leadership lessons of Steve Jobs. Harvard business review, 90(4), 92-102. Northouse, P. G. (2012). Leadership: Theory and practice. London: Sage. Pieterse, A. N., Van Knippenberg, D., Schippers, M., & Stam, D. (2010). Transformational and transactional leadership and innovative behavior: The moderating role of psychological empowerment. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 31(4), 609-623. Puccio, G. J., Mance, M., & Murdock, M. C. (2010). Creative leadership: Skills that drive change. London: Sage Publications. Rast III, D. E., Hogg, M. A., & Giessner, S. R. (2013). Self-uncertainty and support for autocratic leadership. Self and Identity, 12(6), 635-649. Smith, J. A. (Ed.). (2015). Qualitative psychology: A practical guide to research methods. London: Sage. Read More