Leadership Programs Used in Contemporary Organizations - Assignment Example

Leadership programs used in contemporary organizations Leadership as a concept is difficult to define, and literature abounds with definitions of leadership. Chemers describes leadership as the ‘process of social influence in which one person can enlist the aid and support of others in the accomplishment of a common task’ (Chemers, 2002) Leadership is known to be one of the most critical aspects from an organizational context because an organization will never make progress without the direction offered by skilled leadership. Henry Ford, Bill Gates, Richard Branson, Steve Jobs, Laksmi Mittal, etc have made headlines not for the high profile lives that they lead but because of their leadership abilities that have helped them take their individual business organizations to new heights. (Bolden, 2005) So what is it that defines a true leader? Are leaders born or can they be tailor made? Do leadership theories help organizations to develop effective leadership? Some of the giants of leadership development such as CEOs Bill Weiss (Ameritech), Phil Carroll (Shell Oil), and Jack Welch (General Electric) established innovative leadership practices. (Bolden, 2005) Leadership, according to me is a combination of several skills. Some of these are innate and some can be acquired. It is not possible for all people who are in leadership roles to enter the job role with all the necessary skills. Hence, it is the responsibility of organizations to provide their leadership with the appropriate training and feedback to become good leaders. This essay will address some of the questions raised above by discussing several important aspects of leadership including a description of several popular theories and styles of leadership. Leadership programs used in two contemporary organizations will be analyze and compared to support your argument. We first look at the leadership development efforts at GE and Motorola. Next we discuss the leadership theories that form the basis of leadership programs at these organizations. Post that we will present our arguments regarding why we think leadership theories help organizations. Leadership programs at GE (Bolden, 2005) GE is often considered a finishing school for managers who wish to learn how to lead major organizations. GE has an impressive list of former executives who have assumed top positions at other organizations, including Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co., General Signal Corp, Owens Corning, McDonnel Douglas Corp., and USF&G Corp. It is not just the top leaders who focus on leadership development, rather this is system-wide at GE. (Bolden, 2005) It is compulsory for all managers to take part in leadership training at every career stage. Emphasis is given to different skills and competencies at different levels; as a result there is level-specific course content. Development programs are specifically targeted at career transition points in order to help managers to better learn from their present level experiences while preparing them for leadership demands that will be expected of them at the new level. (Bolden, 2005) Leadership development programs train managers to ‘think small and act small’ to enable company growth. The maxim is that managing change is the best way to lead. In keeping with this maxim, GE is doing away with most of its centralized planning. (Bolden, 2005) In today’s business environment, change is rapid and discontinuous and there is no way to effectively plan for it. GE believes that a GE leader should be agile both in thought and action instead of making plans for the unknown and unpredictable future. Quick leadership response is the key to competitive advantage. Welch made it mandatory for every business president, company officer, and senior executive – approximately 1,000 employees – to participate in seven days of change-related training over a period of ten weeks. This was the beginning of the Change Acceleration Process (CAP) at GE. (Bolden, 2005) The aim of the CAP is making people eager to learn, change accepting, and anxious to implement a good idea. These objectives are considered as the core leadership competencies that are important for the GE of the future. They are also the values that are important for leaders to develop in those they lead, especially in cases where the future is unpredictable. The ultimate aim of CAP is creating a cadre of change masters. (Bolden, 2005) Implementation is the key to the GE approach to leadership development. GE has adopted a broad range of best practices including coaching, 360-degree feedback, and action learning. GE does not really do anything new with regard to leadership development. However, ensuring that all their leadership development initiatives are associated with their core values and overall strategy ensures that they prepare their leaders for all challenges they anticipate. (Bolden, 2005) Leadership programs at Motorola The Motorola University is a very important feature of Motorola’s approach to leadership development. The university was originally referred to as the Motorola Training and Education Center (MTEC). An investment of 40 million was made despite a deep recession that year indicating Motorola’s commitment to leadership development. MTEC initially aimed at designing and delivering training services that supported Motorola’s business objectives. Since its establishment in1990, Motorola University has established partnerships with several institutions around the world. The university is the strategic learning arm of the corporation, and complements the training that is provided within the organization. (Bolden, 2005) The University established partnerships with Eastman Kodak, ABB, Digital Equipment, and IBM to accelerate the development of Six Sigma Quality and to ensure that this knowledge was transferred in the most effective manner. The university focuses its efforts on helping managers become change catalysts and ensure continuous improvement that supports the corporation’s business objectives. (Bolden, 2005) Although Six Sigma is billed a quality initiative, it is actually about leadership development. Several individuals within the organization have achieved “Master Black Belt” or “Black Belt” status through in demand candidates for senior leadership positions are generally those who have completed Six Sigma assignments. At Motorola, Six Sigma is has become part of the “genetic code” of future leaders. (Bolden, 2005) In addition to Six Sigma, Motorola also has other important initiatives related to leadership development. Corporate education and development receives an annual budget of more than US dollars one fifty million. (Bolden, 2005) Currently, at Motorola, it is necessary for every employee to have a minimum of 40 hours annually on job-related training and education. The leadership development program content at Motorola varies by level (supervisors, first-time managers, executives); however, each program uses the same general framework but covers different topics. Hersey and Blanchard’s Situational Leadership Theory is used as a basis for the program targeted at lower level managers. (Bolden, 2005) At the senior management level, Motorola has established the Vice President Institute (VPI) that offers guidance in leadership development to newly appointed vice presidents. The VPI mainly addresses the manner in which an organization that already grows by more than 15% annually can sustain growth. (Bolden, 2005) The main aim of establishing VPI was to teach new VPs about the company’s unique heritage as a second-generation, family-owned business. VPI was also established to help them explore ways to innovate and invent new technologies and new businesses (not just new products), with a focus on innovation, globalization, and communications. As such, leadership development is tied directly to a key business imperative. Here all leadership development efforts are targeted at sustaining growth. (Bolden, 2005) An important reason for the success of Motorola’s leadership development structure is the active involvement of top management. These programs are attended by Motorola’s chairman as well as several of the senior team members. Many members of top management instruct and facilitate these development programs. Several members of top management are also on the advisory oard of the Motorola University and on the committee that is in charge of determining the level of funding for development. This support from top management is extremely critical for the leadership development program to succeed. (Bolden, 2005) Leadership theories in use Whether or not it is possible to train or develop leaders is the basis of any argument related to the effectiveness of leadership development. Several theories of leadership have been proposed and early theories have proposed that great leaders were ‘born and not made’. Subsequently proposed theories have questioned this belief and argue that it is possible to learn and acquire leadership behaviours and competencies over time. (Day and Halpin, 2001; Storey, 2004) The current belief is somewhere in between in that it is believed that whilst several leadership qualities (such as strategic thinking, communication skills, and self-awareness) can be developed, the very core personal characteristics (such as dominance and sociability) are cannot really be changed due to their inherent nature and greatly influence the type of leadership style that is adopted. Additionally, the effectiveness of any of the styles adopted is actually determined by a wide range of situational and contextual factors. (Day and Halpin, 2001) The leadership development program at GE and Motorola is based on Hersey and Blanchard’s Situational Leadership Theory. Hersey and Blanchard’s easy-to-understand theory states that managers focus on either the task or relationships. (Hersey and Blanchard, 1977, 1988), Based on this model managers can be categorized as either telling (exhibiting behaviour that is high on task focus and low on relationship focus), selling (exhibiting behaviour that has both a high-task and high-relationship focus), delegate (exhibiting behaviour that has both a low-relationship and low-task focus) or participating (exhibiting behaviour that high-relationship and low-task). Of these behaviour categories, no single style can be considered optimal for all who assume leadership roles to possess. (Hersey-Blanchard Situational Theory, 2009) Effective leadership needs to be flexible; it is important for these leaders to adapt themselves according to the situations they are faced with. Each leader tends to possess his/her own natural style, and he/she must be aware of his/her intrinsic style when applying situational leadership. Both these organizations have adopted a human assets approach in that the CEO and corporate staff add value to the organisation through hiring, retention and development programs. At GE specifically, the change agent approach (Dubrin, Dalglish and Miller, 2006) is adopted and they believe that their most critical role is to create an environment of continual reinvention. Do leadership theories help organizations to develop effective leadership? We are in an environment that is constantly changing. It is necessary for business leaders today to be prepared for that change and to ensure that they are able to rapidly adapt and function in an ever changing environment. Effective leadership in my opinion is one that adapts itself to the changing situations and is able to lead and make correct strategic decisions even in turbulent times. An effective leader is able to balance business needs and the needs of employees. Not all individuals who assume leadership roles are born leaders. Many of the skills are acquired while on the job. Approximately US$50 billion is spent every year on leadership development, thus making leadership development and executive education a big business (Raelin, 2004). A survey conducted in 2003 by Financial Times found that an average of three thousand pounds per participant annually was spent by leading organizations in Europe on executive education; and of the topics offered as part of the programs, leadership, followed by general management, were the most typical (Financial Times, 2003). Hirsh and Carter (2002) mention that there is a rising demand for leadership development and organizations are making provisions for these programs. Day (2001) indicates that leadership development and management development are different. Leadership development involves a larger extent preparing people for roles and situations that are way beyond their current responsibilities. Leadership development is viewed as a process involving every person in the organisation. As observed in the case of GE and Motorola, there is more to establishing successful leadership development programs than just using a proposed leadership theory. While they have absorbed elements proposed by the theory into their programs, the actual reason for the success of these programs has been the strong commitment of top management and the implementation culture. Leadership theories in my opinion only form a basis for developing leadership programs in that they provide a more rational basis for imparting training by understanding leadership related behaviours and elements. They cannot and should not be considered as the only factors that will contribute to the development of effective leadership in organizations. REFERENCES Bolden R.(ed.) (2005). What is Leadership Development? Purpose and practice. Leadership South West Report. Retrieved from http://eric.exeter.ac.uk/exeter/handle/10036/77193 Chemers, M. M. (2002). Cognitive, social, and emotional intelligence of transformational leadership: Efficacy and Effectiveness. In R. E. Riggio, S. E. Murphy, F. J. Pirozzolo (Eds.), Multiple Intelligences and Leadership. NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc. Day, D. (2001). Leadership development: a review in context. Leadership Quarterly, 11(4), 581-613. Day, D. V. and Halpin, S. (2001). Leadership Development: A Review of Industry Best Practices Retrieved from www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/army/tr1111.pdf Dubrin, J., Dalglish, C. & Miller, P. (2006). Leadership. 2nd Asia-Pacific Edition. Milton, Qld: John Wiley & Sons. Financial Times (2003, September 8). Companies still value training. Financial Times, Special Report on Business Education. Hersey, P. and Blanchard, K. (1969) Lifecycle theory of leadership. Training and Development Journal, 23, 26-34. Hersey, P. and Blanchard, K. (1977) Management of Organizational Behaviour. Englewood Cliffs NJ: Prentice Hall. Hersey, P. and Blanchard, K. (1988). Management of Organizational Behavior: Utilizing Human Resources. Englewood Cliffs NJ: Prentice Hall International. Hersey-Blanchard situational theory. (2009, July 28). In Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. Retrieved 18:47, July 28, 2009, from http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Hersey-Blanchard_situational_theory&oldid=304726424 Hirsh W. and Carter A. (2002). New Directions in Management Development, IES Report 387, Brighton: Institute for Employment Studies. Raelin, J. (2004). Don’t bother putting leadership into people. Academy of Management Executive, 18, 131-135. Storey, J. (2004). Changing theories of leadership and leadership development. In J. Storey (eds) Leadership in Organizations: Current issues and key trends. London: Routledge. Read More