World Transformational Leaders, Transformational Leadership Style Applied in the Team - Assignment Example

Running Head: MANAGEMENT THEORY Name Course Instructor Date TASK 1 World Transformational Leaders Barack Obama Martin Luther Nelson Mandela John F Kennedy Abraham Lincoln Alexander the Great Julius Ceasar Napoleon Pope John Paul Mahatma Gandhi. Analyze leaders by using the spheres of influence Leadership can be defined as a process of social influence in which an individual enlists the help and support of other people in accomplishing a common task. There are various leadership styles which include: personality, communication patterns and demeanor in guiding others towards reaching organizational objectives. This task will focus on analyzing leaders through using their sphere of influence trying to define what makes a leader a great leader. Sphere of influence is defined as a spatial concept or region division over which an organization has a level of economic, political and cultural exclusivity. Nelson Mandela, John F. Kennedy, Martin Luther King and Abraham Lincoln can be considered to be revolutionary leaders that assisted their citizens against certain negative perceptions (Casse and Claudel, 2011). These leaders display the transformational leadership style. Transformational leadership is defined as a leadership style that constitutes a process that transforms as well as changes people being led. In simpler terms, transformational leadership is the ability of an individual to get individuals to want to change, to improve and to be effectively led (Casse and Claudel, 2011). Martin Luther, John Kennedy, Nelson Mandela, Barack Obama Abraham Lincoln Alexander the Great, Julius Ceasar, Napoleon, Pope John Paul and Mahatma Gandhi are considered to be transformational leaders as they posses four factors that define transformational leadership. Firstly, these leaders have inspirational motivation that enables individuals to commit themselves to a certain vision. Nelson Mandela was involved in organizing fights against apartheid in South Africa. He was involved in organizing and leading others to fight for their freedom. Martin Luther is known for his motivational phrase “I have a dream” which share some aspects with Barrack Obama’s phrase “Yes we can” (Jung and Sosik, J2006). Lincoln (a new birth of freedom), is considered to be the most successful president of the United States of America. He is considered to be transformational leaders due to his ability to stand for what he believed to be right. These leaders further posses the factor known as intellectual stimulation in their time of leadership. These leaders have constantly been engaged in encouraging creativity and innovation by way of challenging normal views as well as beliefs of groups (Jung and Sosik, 2006). Through encouraging innovation and creativity, these leaders have been in a position to promote problem solving and critical thinking skills making the world a better place. Transformational leaders are considered to have idealized influences and are role models to the people they are leading. It is quite evident that leaders’ influences are respected and trusted by the people they are leading to make good decisions that positively change the world (Northhouse, 2013). Finally, transformational leaders normally emphasize individual consideration. Leaders with individual consideration encourage the people they lead to reach goals that will assist both their sphere of influence and the people being led. Strengths and weaknesses of transformational leadership From the above analyses of leaders and their sphere of influence, it is quite evident that transformational leadership just like any other approach has strengths and weaknesses. One of the main strengths of transformational leadership style as displayed by different world leaders is that they are able to positively influence their followers on all levels (Shankman and Allen, 2008). Nelson Mandela was able to influence the South Africans to shun racism and come together as one citizen of the country. Also, Martin Luther King, John F. Kennedy, Barrack Obama and other transformational leaders have been involved in strongly emphasizing their followers’ values and needs which resulted to intended change within their spheres of influence (Shankman and Allen, 2008). Transformational leadership has widely been criticized to have self centered assumptions. These leaders are considered to be inherently rational and emotional. The transformational leaders named above use their emotions to maintain psychological distance from their followers whereas encouraging the followers on obedience, submission and dependence. In addition, transformational leadership is widely criticized of lacking concerns for ethics and morality (Shankman and Allen, 2008). It is quite evident that authenticated leadership required an individual to be true to others including themselves and while doing this, they must be grounded in moral foundation and ethical values. The other observable weakness is that transformational leadership consists of many components that are very broad. Here, leadership is treated as personality characteristics as compared to a learned behavior and thus a possibility of power abuse by these leaders (Shankman and Allen, 2008). Transformational leadership lacks the concept of clarity. This type of leadership approach has various attributes namely; motivating, creating a vision, building of trust, being an agent of change and empowering. With these attributes it is quite difficult to clearly define this leadership approach boundaries. Further, transformational leadership is interpreted as an all or nothing model instead of a matter of degree (Zaccaro, 2007). Evidently, there is a tendency to look at transformational leadership as very few leaders can achieve it as opposed to using this approach as a continuum that incorporates the different components of leadership. What makes a good leader? Clearly, leadership can be defined as a quality that is hidden in the personality of an individual. Leadership largely depends on the structure of an individual personality which includes intelligence, skill, experience and social interactions. From the above analyses of different leaders and their spheres of influence, it is quite evident that there are many things that make individuals good leaders. Firstly, a leader must be in a position to practice what he stands for. The above listed leaders were involved in selflessly practicing what they preach. For instance, Nelson Mandela fought to ensure that South Africa was free from apartheid and racism. Mandela was imprisoned for what he believed was a right and as a result South Africans today enjoy a nation that is free from racism. A good leader is one who is able to look after his followers. Leaders are not expected to be partial to their followers. Once a leader is partial, he loses the confidence of other individuals. Leaders should be action oriented. Clearly, leaders cannot do all things by themselves and therefore need the help of other individuals. Like the leaders listed above, a leader is expected to be effective towards self as well as encourage his followers to do constructive work. The above listed leaders through their action oriented approach were able to attract large masses of people through their speeches and encouraging their followers to work for their country without prejudice. Leaders are expected to have positive attitude. It is evident that in order to achieve desired goals, one should be optimistic through encouraging innovation and creativity. How transformational leadership style should be applied in the team Transformational leadership is considered to be the only leadership style of group management that has the potential of empowering team members to work towards a specified goal. I believe the group understands that for one to be a leader he/she has to have solid understanding of concept team skills, team management, managing team members and monitoring their performance (Joseph and Winston, 2005). It is evident that these skills can be termed as the basis on which a transformational team leader is most successful. Within the group, leaders are expected to have an objective of ensuring there is positive change for the team. Here, the group leader needs to use his energy as well as passion to assist in fueling cohesion among team members. The group leader can be considered as transformational when he understands the team’s objectives to be successful and be articulate in explaining these objectives and the different method that they can achieve them (Joseph and Winston, 2005). The leader needs to understand that change within the groups does not really happen at the team but rather among team members. The team requires transformational leadership since it needs to be dynamic so as to thrive amidst competition from other groups in class. TASK 2 The attitudes of European managers towards leadership practices Today, more than ever, organizations and business are finding the importance to adopt more global mind sets so as to remain viable in the global market environment. In recent times, there has been much debate that has been directed at the attitudes of European managers towards leadership practices (Laub, 2003). Most of the efforts have focused on risk taking, decision making, organizational design and strategic planning. European managers tend to adopt a participative approach in their style of leadership. The British managers adopt this approach due to two reasons. Firstly, the political environment in Britain favours the approach and secondly, top most British managers are not regularly involved in the day to day affairs of the organizations (Laub, 2003). The British managers tend to delegate authority allowing both middle and low level leaders to make most decisions. This is contrary to the German and the French managers who prefer an approach that is more work centered and one that adopts an authoritarian leadership style. From a more general observation, most European managers tend to adopt the use of participative approach. Participatory leadership approach is defined as a paradigm that is largely based on engagement and respect (Patterson, 2003). This approach focuses energy in both employees’ and managers’ encounters. It can further be defined as a more effective model of leadership since it is more advanced and democratic compared to other approaches of leadership. Further, European managers’ attitudes towards leadership styles largely depend on the size of the company, the level and age of the managers (Patterson, 2003). Research indicates that in most countries across European continent, higher level managers tend to express more democratic values as compared to lower level managers. For instance in England, managers in a higher level responded well with more democratic attitudes on risk taking, decision making, organizational design and strategic planning dimensions. Company size is also a factor that influences the degree of the European participative attitudes. It is further evident that, managers in smaller organizations believed that people have a capacity for leadership as opposed to their counterparts in larger organizations. Managers in larger organizations support sharing of objectives and information, use of internal control and participation (Donaldson, 2002). Age also influenced the attitude of European managers based on leadership. Managers considered to be young are considered to have more democratic values especially in regard to leadership capacity, sharing objectives as well as information. Younger managers in Germans espoused their democratic values as compared to their old counterparts (Donaldson, 2002). In conclusion, European managers tend to reflect on democratic and participative attitudes. In addition, company size, age and organizational level greatly influence attitude towards leadership across Europe. The European managers have certain attitudes that are designed to ensure that workers’ perceptions are shaped correctly so as to respond to the increased organizational change. It is evident that most evident based research show that most of the European managers tend to adopt a more participative approach (Donaldson, 2002). Research indicates that European higher level managers tend to express democratic attitude in this kind of participatory approach in their different styles of leadership. Compare and contrast leadership styles in Japan with those in the United States Leadership styles play an important role in organizational success. Leadership styles vary from one country to another. Leadership styles are highly characterized by way of making decisions. Countries adopt different leadership styles based on the culture of the organization, nature of the workforce, both skills and personality of leaders (Ghoshal, 2005). There are various similarities and differences in leadership styles in Japan the United States (US). There are a number of ways that the US leadership style differs from those in Japan. For instance, the Haire and Associates found out that apart from the internal control, large United States organizations tend to be more democratic compared to smaller ones. On the other hand, in Japan, the profile of these companies is different (Ghoshal, 2005). Leaders in Japan adopt a more authoritarian style which constitutes many management directives and rigid instructions. On the other hand, the US leaders place less emphasis on the leadership personality and rather opt to put more weight on the leadership style and performance. United States leaders are known to limit their scope of issues and questions while placing emphasis on identifying of problems and employees to work on them and creation of goals that are attainable. On the contrary, Japanese leaders are inclusive when it comes to considering organizational problems or issues. Here, the leaders seek out for larger information to define the problems and engage all its employees in finding the solution to these problems (Stoner, Edward and Gilbert, 2003). Organizational structures in Japan are considered to be highly bureaucratic with over-centralized authority. Overcentralization of power results in ambiguous as well as unpredictable business environments. On the other hand, leadership styles in the US are less bureaucratic as they allow delegation of power and authority. Further, the style provides room for a more decentralized structure (Stoner, Edward and Gilbert, 2003). Japanese leadership style gives room for ad hoc planning as most organizational decisions are made at the highest level of management. As a result, the reluctance to take high risk is inherent in decision making. In contrast, leaders in US are involved in various sophisticated planning techniques that adapt modern tools that aid in decision making. Japanese leaders mostly focus on issues and problems whereas US leaders focus on opportunities. Here, Japanese leaders are willing to allow poor performance to continue for some time so that employees can learn from the mistake whereas in the US, leaders work to stop the problem as quick as possible. Further, Japanese leaders tend to seek for creative approaches in managing organizations as opposed to over reliance to experience whereas American leaders tend to build on their past experiences (Stoner, Edward and Gilbert, 2003). There are various similarities that exist between the Japanese and United States leadership styles. For instance, in the United States, Saturn has proved to be one of the General Motors successful in new auto offering (Stoner, Edward and Gilbert, 2003). It is evident that the management of workers used at the Saturn plant is quite different compared to the one used in other General Motor plants. Here, all workers were given attention in all decision making processes. Japanese organization such as Sony has adapted the same approach in encouraging their employees to assume power and work as a team. Both the US and Japanese leadership styles place emphasis on developing effective communication channel which link the management level and employees. With increased competition across the globe, both the US and Japanese leaders are shifting from individualism to team orientation towards enhancing their competitive edge (Stoner, Edward and Gilbert, 2003). Relationship of culture clusters and leader behavior to effective leadership practices It is evident that whereas research tends to support universalism in leadership behavior, it is quite notable that effective leadership behavior varies significantly within cultural clusters. There are several global cultural clusters namely; Sub-Saharan Africa, Anglo, Nordic Europe, Eastern Europe, Latin Europe, Germanic Europe, middle east, Confucian Asian, Southern Asia and Latin America. Culture plays an important role in explaining how leaders need to act so as to be effective. According to inherent leadership theory, people have implicit convictions and beliefs about the belief and attributes that distinguish non-leaders and effective leaders. Leaders that are defined to be in affective culture such as in the United States tend to express their emotions whereas those in the neutral culture such as China and Japan, leaders tend to exhibit their emotions (Ghoshal, 2005). For instance, American leaders tend to express their emotions and this enables them to separate between objective and rational decisions. On the other hand, the Italians tend to exhibit their emotions but they do not separate it into rational and objective decisions like the Americans do. In these two examples, one can argue that emotions exhibited by leaders can change one judgment despite all effort to be rational or on the other hand, one can argue that expressing emotions for anyone present to think straight. The researches further found out that the manner in which leaders speak to their people highly influence the outcome of their performance. For instance, in the Anglo-Saxon, it is ordinary for leaders to raise their voice so as to put emphasis on a particular voice. On the other hand, leaders in Asian culture speak at the same level all the way through their communication ensuring they maintain self control to reflect respect to other people (Ghoshal, 2005). Latin leaders continually engaged in varying their tone. This enabled them to show commitment to what they say. From the above examples, it is important for one to understand how to communicate as this can influence one’s leadership across cultures. In conclusion, it is important to note that one key strategy to successful global leadership is to know what behavior and style work well within a given culture. Globalization has and continues to create the need for leaders to become more competent in cross cultural practices and awareness. Leaders need to learn to relate with individuals from other cultures from a position of equality as opposed to culture superiority (Ghoshal, 2005). With increased globalization, leaders are expected to develop visions and objectives that are trans-cultural. Leaders from all global cultural clusters view good leadership based on charisma, interpersonal ability and integrity. References Casse, P & Claudel, P. (2011). Leadership styles: a powerful model. TJ, 46-51 Jung, D. & Sosik, J (2006). Who are the spellbinders? Identifying personal attributes of charismatic leaders. Journals of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 87: 765-780 Northhouse, P. (2013). Leadership: Theory and practice. SAGE Publications, Inc Shankman, M. & Allen, S (2008). Emotionally intelligent leadership: A guide for college students. CA: Jossey-Bass Zaccaro, J (2007). Trait-based perspectives of leadership. American Psychologist, 62, 6-16 Joseph, E., & Winston, E. (2005). A correlation of servant leadership, leader trust, and organizational trust. Leadership and Organization Development Journal , 26(1),6-22. Laub, J. (2003). From paternalism to the servant organization: expading the organizational leadership assessment model. Patterson, A. (2003). Servant leadership; a theoretical model. Regent University. Donaldson, L 2002, Damned by our own theories: Contradictions between theories and management education. Academy of Management Learning & Education,1(1): 96–10 Ghoshal, S 2005, Bad management theories are destroying good management practices. Academy of Management Learning and Education, 4(1), 75-91. Stoner J. A., Edward F. R., Gilbert, D 2003, Management (6th ed). New Delhi: Prentice-Hall of India. Read More