Leadership and Management within the Context of a Globalized Environment - Coursework Example

Running Head: LEADERSHIP Leadership Name Institution Date Introduction to Leadership Leadership is a complex subject that is defined differently by different people. According to Stogdill (1974), there exists as many leadership definitions as there are individuals who have tried to define it. This is because, leadership is a concept that is open to subjective analysis. Each individual has their own instinctive understanding of leadership depending on their knowledge and experience. Northouse (2004), identifies four themes that are common in the different perceptions of leadership: leadership is a process that involves influence, and occurs in a group context with goals to be achieved. In other words, it is a process whereby people are influenced by a certain individual to achieve a particular objective. Most leadership definitions reflect the notion that leadership is a social process whereby deliberate influence is applied by an individual (or group) over other individuals (or groups) to shape the activities and interactions in an organisation or institution (Yukl, 2002). In general, leadership is an intricate concept that touches on many organisational, personal and social processes. It involves inspiring people to work towards achieving certain goals through motivation and not coercion. Leadership and Management Management and leadership are regularly used interchangeably, however, they are two distinct and complementary concepts. According to Yukl (2010), managers are concerned with stability while leaders are concerned with innovation; managers have people do things more proficiently, whereas leaders engage people in deciding and agreeing about the things that should be done. Managers are people appointed officially to hold certain authoritative positions in institutions or organizations. They facilitate others to perform their tasks and are answerable to higher authorities for results. Primarily, different levels of managers vary in the degrees of power and the range of their accountability. Some philosophers and academicians differentiate leaders and managers, based on the belief that management involves a lot of caretaking and maintenance of status quo (thus it is transactional), while, leadership is visionary and dynamical (thus transformational) (Burke & Friedman, 2011). Leadership is a management skill and as leaders, managers influence followers to realize certain objectives because they possess power and authority. According to Kotter (2001), managers are the individuals to whom management role is given and are normally thought to realize the anticipated objectives through the vital processes of staffing and organization, accounting and planning, problem resolution and control, while, leaders establish a goal and align, motivate and inspire people towards achieving that goal. Kotterman (2006), highlights that a properly balanced institution should have a mixture of managers and leaders to prosper. Effective Leadership The concept of effective leadership is defined in many different ways. Basically, it is the successful use of personal influence by an individual or a group of people that culminates in realizing common objectives in a manner that is individually satisfying to those concerned. Effective leadership is precedented by some fundamental principles. These include: building mutual goals, and set of ethics that assist people to focus on their inputs in ensuring the best output; establishing a brave communication atmosphere that promotes precise and straightforward feedback mechanism; availing information to every person; establishing respect and trust among people; having perseverance and showing concern for each individual; demonstrating inventiveness and readiness to learn; and creating a conducive environment for exemplary performance (Fenimore & Nirenberg, 2012). An effective leader should possess both personal and interpersonal leadership skills. Personal leadership skills include: authenticity, self-confidence, truthful communication, ability to give and accept feedback, self-reflection, and ability to initiate dialogue, creativity and self-discipline among others. Interpersonal skills of leadership include: dispute resolution skills, team building, consensus creation skills, and offering peer administration and training. According to Maxwell (1999), effective leaders must possess various indispensable characteristics: a person of character, charismatic, committed, able to communicate effectively, competent, courageous, discerning, focused, generous, industrious, passionate, able to listen, having a positive attitude, capable of solving problems, responsible, ability to relate with others, self-disciplined, teachable, visionary and a servant. Globalization and Leadership Globalization is a developing complex concept that is hard to operationalize because of the many definitions and hypothetical interpretations regularly used to explain this exceptionally intricate occurrence. According to Litz (2011), globalization is a multidimensional philosophical and politically driven process that is largely used as a principal umbrella terminology to explain the complex sequence of social, economic, technological, political, and military variations that generally shift investment funds, goods, ideas, people, services, and enterprises beyond domestic and state borders into a greater global realm which, has the consequence of increasing the interconnectedness and interdependence between different cultures, people, ethnic groups, organizations and government institutions from different localities into a broader international arena. Globalization has presented a situation of international integration whereby societies are shifting from independent countries to a more integrated world. Globalization presents great opportunities as well as growing complexity for societies worldwide. As a matter of fact, globalization has resulted into changes in the needs of businesses and societies thus necessitating fundamental transformations in leadership approaches and styles. The dynamic environment we live in demands a corresponding leadership revolution in order to ensure that leaders execute their mandates in developing strong sustainable enterprises, and prospering communities both for today and the future. Globalization has several dimensions all of which impact enormously on leadership. They include: political globalization, economic globalization, environmental globalization, socio-cultural globalization, demographic globalization, and technological globalization among others. One of the most noticeable impacts of globalization on leadership is the fact that people increasingly expect leaders to be capable of coping with the rapidly increasing difficulties and sophisticated challenges of the 21st century. The other effect is that leaders are expected to maintain fundamental principles of social changes (for example, equity and social justice), as well as representing visionary capability, going beyond boundary-confined entrepreneurship, employing new professional expertise, obtaining instructional strategies and assessment skills, and embracing effective crisis management in this new international era (Scott & Webber, 2008). Globalization therefore, necessitates the development of a diversity of new and fundamental trends in management activities and leadership patterns. The Evolution of Leadership Leadership designs have changed over time. There has been a prominent shift from the twentieth century monocratic and directive style of leadership to a more democratic and inclusive style of the new world. These changes are attributed to a number of factors including a change in people’s mindsets as well as advancement in technology. The monocratic/autocratic design of leadership puts more emphasis on performance rather than the people. There is an assumption that people are apathetic, irresponsible, and unreliable and that decision making and any planning activity should be done by the leader with marginal employee participation. Autocratic leaders apply power, authority, manipulation, control and hard work to achieve their goals. Laissez Faire is another old style of leadership that cannot work in today’s society. This is because a laissez faire leader puts little emphasis on people and performance as well. The assumption is that people are uncontrollable, unpredictable and that a leader’s task is just to do enough to manage the work, maintain a low profile, and stay away from problems, and as much as possible leave people alone. On the other hand, democratic leadership also known as participative leadership, and human relations leadership are efficient styles of governance in this global world. A democratic leader puts great emphasis on both performance and people. The assumption is that people are trustworthy, honest, and will work hard to achieve significant goals in the society. Democratic leadership aims at a well-organized working environment whereby every individual has well defined goals and responsibilities to guide their actions. Democratic leaders achieve their goals by motivating people to maximize their potential in realizing organizational as well as their own objectives. The human relations type of leadership places more emphasis on people and little importance on performance. In this type of leadership, it is assumed that people are self-motivated, trustworthy, and honest. This style encourages a permissive, supportive and a participative work environment that will ensure productivity of workers (Warrick, 1981). Team work and a participatory approach in decision making play key roles in the management of institutions. In general, the evolution of leadership has seen a shift from dictatorial leaders who believed in top-down management to a more inclusive methodology of bottom-up management. Today’s leaders talk of collaborations and open dialogues where every individual is given a chance to participate fairly. This is because people no longer accept intimidation, and never like decisions being imposed on them. Emerging Global Trends in Leadership Since there has been numerous changes in the world over time, various leadership concepts have been developed in recent years to explain leadership in a rapidly changing world. The first paradigm that has evolved in this new era is the concept of transformational leadership which has emerged in response to growing global patterns and pressures (Hallinger, 2005). Transformational leadership is imbedded in ‘westernized’ neo-liberalized socio-political and economic philosophies and has emerged concurrently with an increasing interest in the connection between leadership, culture, and the concepts of change and development as being vital processes (Huber & West, 2002; Huber, 2004). According to Leithwood (2007), transformational leadership involves four key dimensions: establishing directions with a common goal; developing people by offering personal support and intellectual stimulus; developing collaborative cultures by building and restructuring productive relations with shareholders and societies; and recruiting staffs to provide instructional support. The second noticeable pattern of leadership that has emerged of late is the distributed paradigm of leadership. This concept instigated in the 1980’s highlighting the improved organisational capacity of societies to rely on collective leadership (Sergiovanni, 1984). Distributed leadership involves various fundamental dimensions: viewing leadership as a result of the dynamics of interactive relationships and not a single person’s action; honesty and trust as a foundation for relationships; extending the margins of leadership to all people, thus generating a team spirit; growing rather than mandating leadership; recognizing knowledge and expertise as the base of leadership roles; and viewing leadership as a fluid thus concealing the difference between leaders and their followers (Litz, 2011). The Leadership of Steven Ballmer Steven Anthony Ballmer has been the Chief Executive Officer of Microsoft Corporation since January 2000 until August 2014. Ballmer is an American born on 24 March 1956 in Michigan. Steven Ballmer has headed several Microsoft divisions during the period between 1980 and 1998 including the development of operating systems, promoting sales and providing support of all operations in the corporation. In July 1998 Steven was elevated to Presidency, and in January 2000, he was appointed the Chief Executive Officer of Microsoft, replacing Bill Gates. At Microsoft Corporation, Ballmer concentrated on transforming the working environment to ensure the company’s responsiveness to dynamic consumer needs, technologies and marketplace changes. He also contributed to the development of good relationships with key business allies at all levels. He was a key player in the realization of the company’s goals and objectives and formed a very effective leadership that saw the company grow and make tremendous profits (Landau, 2007). Steve is described as an extraordinary leader who racked up revenues and market share in commercial enterprises. He portrayed a result-oriented type of leadership that turned Microsoft into a force that revolutionized the world’s use of computers. He propelled the company’s position in software markets and enhanced the company’s profits. During his leadership, revenue tripled to almost $78 billion in the year 2014 (Langley, 2013). Despite his exemplary performance in seeing the company realize great profits, Ballmer is accused of doing nothing towards growing the company to become a provider of devices and services. He however, as a good leader made efforts though minimal to grow the company towards this direction but this was just before his exit from the company. Steve Ballmer employed the transformational form of leadership whereby he placed personalized consideration of his follower’s needs and concerns therefore, intrinsically motivating his followers to tactfully execute their tasks. Ballmer also created an environment whereby his followers were intellectually stimulated to think intensely about issues and work out better ways to accomplish their tasks. Ballmer also gave inspirational motivation to his followers who developed a solid sense of purpose. Steven Ballmer influenced his followers with ideas and hence, gained respect and trust. Enderle (2014), explains a number of distinctive characteristics of Ballmer’s leadership. He argues that Ballmer was always brief and to the point whenever he was communicating. This precision enabled him to personally influence many people. This was important because, when leading a big organization, rambling wastes time and makes one lose the point. Enderle also describes Ballmer as a man of numbers. This was an asset for him and contributed to his success since numbers define the success or failure of leaders. On the other hand, Enderle notices some leadership traits that didn’t work for Ballmer. Owing to the fact that Ballmer was a directive leader, he used to appoint people based on their loyalty and not competence. This is why at times, he made wrong and imprecise decisions. Ballmer is also accused of isolating himself from people and concentrating on the individuals who apparently sought to control the outcome of his activities. Steve Ballmer’s Communication Styles Communication is paramount in any leadership setting since without it, the leaders will move alone. Every individual has got a distinctive way of communication. Getting to know one’s communication style helps to achieve better self- knowledge and contribute to the development of more efficient interpersonal relationships. Precise self-awareness is actually the initial step towards achieving effectiveness at work and handling relationships with self, and other people. Steve Ballmer during his leadership at Microsoft demonstrated the characteristics of the director style of Communication. He is described as a “take charge” kind of a person who uses the directive way of communication. The directive style presents a sense of supremacy where there is dominance and little friendship. For effective communication, people with the directive style of communication should embrace some important adaptation strategies which include: being brief, specific and to the point; presenting facts sensibly and providing precise answers; projecting an image of confidence and power; and using time efficiently. In my opinion, Ballmer understood his style of communication and managed to relate well with his followers hence the observed growth of the company (Reece, Brandat, & Howie, 2011). Due to his desire to satisfy the needs of his customers, Steven Ballmer embraced good communication relationships that demonstrated his competence in leadership Conclusion Leadership is a resourceful element of every organization, institution or society. The success or failure of a certain activity or program is defined by its leadership. Due to the dynamic nature of the world, there is eminent need for leadership patterns that of our changing societies. This means that leadership is not static, but is a dynamic process that is responsive to the needs presented by in situation. The heterogeneous nature of organizations, businesses and societies call for identification of a leadership pattern that best suits each organization. The best style of leadership is determined by an analysis of situational variables thus, there is no single style of leadership that relates to all given workplace circumstances. Choosing the best style of leadership for an institution entails the understanding of the nature of work, the complexity of the institution, and the skills of the followers. The style of leadership, for example, that is required by a leader of state security would vary from the form of leadership required by a theatre director. The state security leader would apply authoritative style of leadership while the movie director would apply the creative or charismatic form of leadership. References Burke, E. and Friedman, H. (2011). Essentials of Management and Leadership in Public Health. Sudbury: Jones & Bartlett Learning Enderle, R. (2014). 8 Leadership Lessons from Steve Ballmer. Retrieved on September, 27, 2014, from http://www.cio.com/article/2597543/leadership-management/8-leadership-lessons-from-steve-ballmer.html Fenimore, J. and Nirenberg, J. (2012). "Leadership Effectiveness." Encyclopedia of Leadership. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications Hallinger, P. (2005). Instructional leadership and the school principal: A passing fancy that refuses to fade away. Leadership and Policy in Schools, Vol.43 (3), pp. 1-20 Huber, S. & West, M. (2002). Developing school leaders: A critical review of current practices, approaches and issues, and some directions for the future. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers. Huber, S. (2004). School leadership and leadership development: Adjusting leadership theories and development programs to values and core purposes of school. Journal of Educational Administration, Vol. 42(6), pp. 669-684 Kotterman, J. (2006). “Leadership versus Management: What’s the Difference?” Journal for Quality & Participation, Vol. 29(2), pp.13-17 Landau, S. (2007). Ethical Theory: An Anthology. Malden, Mass: Blackwell. Langley, M. (2013). Ballmer on Ballmer: His Exit from Microsoft. Retrieved on September 27, 2014, from http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702303460004579194150724298162#printMode Leithwood, K. (2007). What we know about educational leadership. Dordrecht: Springer Litz, D. (2011). Globalization and the Changing Face of Educational Leadership: Current Trends and Emerging Dilemmas. Journal of International Education Studies, Vol.4 (3) Maxwell, J. (1999). The 21 Indispensable Qualities of a Leader: Becoming the Person Others Will Want to Follow. Nashville Dallas Mexico City: Thomas Nelson Northouse, G. (2004). Leadership: Theory and Practice (3rd Edition). London: Sage Publications Ltd. Reece, L., Brandat, R., & Howie, F. (2011). Effective Human Relations: Interpersonal and Organizational Applications. Mason: South-Western Cengage Learning Scott, S. & Webber, F. (2008). Evidence-based leadership development: The 4L Framework. Journal of Educational Administration, Vol.46 (6), pp. 762-776 Sergiovanni, T. (1984). Leadership and excellence in schooling. Excellent schools need freedom within boundaries. Educational Leadership, Vol. 41(5), pp. 4-14 Stogdill, M. (1974). Handbook of Leadership: A Survey of Theory and Research. New York: Free Press. Warrick, D. (1981). Leadership Styles and their Consequences. University of Colorado: Colorado Springs Yukl, G. (2006). Leadership in Organizations (6th Edition). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall. Yukl, G. (2010). Leadership in organizations (7th Edition.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall Read More