Organizational Conflict - Essay Example

Organizational Conflict Name: Tutor: Course: Date: Introduction The aim of this essay is to establish whether transformational or charismatic leaders are the only effective leaders in current organizational leadership. Transformational leaders are theorized to be influential among their followers since they ignite their followers’ mission and sense of purpose hence influencing their goals and lower order needs in the event of reaping long-term benefits for the group they belong (Dionne et al. 2004). Transformational or transactional leadership has merits and its demerits. The main advantages are charisma or idealized influence, inspirational motivation, intellectual stimulation and individualized consideration (Bass & Avolio, 1994). On the contrary, transformational leaders have been associated with too much emotion and passion while overlooking reality and truth. The leaders have also been critiqued for struggling with detailed orientation. Though there is no ultimate leadership style, the situational theorists still recognize that transformational leadership is valuable when leading a group to achieve greater heights through inspiration and motivation. The leaders are lauded for formulating vision and carrying quick assessment of the company’s current situation. Despite the demerits, it remains that transformational leaders are the current leaders cherished in a pragmatic world (Bono & Judge, 2003). Transformational leadership Transformational leaders are deemed to be the most effective leaders to lead. Bass (1990) suggests that these leaders operate in a power range dubbed as more referent where people voluntarily submit to power and followership owing to believe of vision and cause of the leader. These leaders inspire colleagues and followers with a compelling vision to attain superior results. Bass and Avolio (1994) contend that employees through these leaders can attain superior outcomes hence making the current company successful. In the world that is very competitive and uncertain, the transformational leader is the only one to inspire employees, partners, suppliers and others to achieve more than they could perceive (Conger & Kanungo, 1987). They are the best leaders to give a shot at effective work environment than bureaucrats, autocrats, laizzes faire and transactional leaders. However, Northouse (2010) and Dionne et al. (2004) dissents this view noting that transformational leaders do not necessarily share power but strongly reject any challenge or question to their leadership. The power will lack intrinsic limits since the organization is only articulate din idealized terms making the employees removed from reality and truism. Yukl (2010) also shares similar opinion that though other styles use rewards and punishment to gain followership, charismatic leaders are manipulative since they are capable of making all sides of arguments look plausible by seeking to provoke passion and not reason in people (Conger, 1999). Therefore, transformational leaders opts to suppress reason and ignite passion and enthusiasm hence making followers and not thinkers needed in an organizational environment requiring innovativeness and creativity (Conger & Kanungo, 2008; DeChurch & Mesmer-Magnus, 2010). Many companies in the current business environment experience low sales, low employee morale and reputation. Colbert et al. (2008) reiterates that transformational leaders are gaining ground and popularity especially in companies experiencing significant transition and needs a spark. They typically have the charisma necessary to develop vision and inspire others to offer followership. They are known to make their best in uplifting companies that have low morale (Festinger, 2004). Vision is an essential trait in leadership. Transformational leaders are conspicuous from other leadership styles in the way they quickly evaluate the company’s current circumstances and formulate the vision for improvement or growth. Howell (1988) agrees that transformational leaders are capable of communicating the vision quite well to all employees and other company leaders so that each one of them aligns with the organizational vision. By doing so, these leaders are able to handle the challenges associated with seeing issues in a bigger picture (Kaiser, Hogan & Craig, 2008). There is a potential capability of a transformational leader getting narcistic when it comes to self-promotion and motivation. Keller (1992) notes that charismatic leadership is detrimental to the leader in a way that under extreme conditions the leader turns to pathological and malignant narcissim as power increases. The leader tends to be incorrectible as their excesses become permissible in the organization (Keller, 2006). In a similar note, these leaders do not value the details as they are not involved in the real day-to-day implementation of organizational activities if the purpose is to change and motivate. Theoretically, the leader may be totally ignorant about the task details but understands the organization in general terms (Klein & House, 2005). This engenders the problem of limited knowledge. They can potentially fall back rhetoric and stock phrases representing historic and superhuman significance. They at times exemplify a politician or a cult leader at its worst where passion dominates reason and rhetoric dominates substance while docility subdues critical thinking. Transformational leaders have the ability to motivate and inspire others hence aligning the leadership to organizational vision. According to Kotter (1990), charismatic leaders maximize enthusiasm and passion to enable employees and team members optimize performance. They are the best leaders when the organizational is experiencing tough times since they rely on their passion to get employees headed in a common direction and sell their vision. The energy possessed by the leader is ideally carried through the organization by employees (Kudisch et al. 2005). On the contrary, transformational leaders despite the big picture inspirations and visions struggle with detailed orientation. These leaders require support from detail-oriented and organized people such as assistants, executives, and additional leadership where the team members can assist in keeping the vision along the right path (Northouse, 2010). Oversight of small issues derails the organization and its long-term vision. In addition, overdependence on enthusiasm and passion may limit the capability of the leader to delve into research, logical reasoning and studies that allow for understanding of harsh truths about the organization. The leader needs willingness if he or she should motivate change and uncover the truth (Piccolo & Colquitt, 2006). A charismatic leader stretches, motivates and inspires the average employee. The normally complacent and plodding employees can generate results where other managers with experience have been unable to ride. Raudenbush and Bryk (2002) agree that through a charismatic leader, an employee will feel that their concerns and opinions are addressed hence happiness and excellence thrives. These leaders also make the work environment more interesting, appealing and interesting with personalities with drive, expectations and enthusiasm. Being the chair leaders of the organization they push the employees to get most wins within the structure of the company since the environment is less stressful and suitable for productivity (Salancik & Pfeffer, 2008). The leaders limit their interaction by failing to ask for input from their subordinates. Bono and Judge (2003) say that charismatic leaders often tend to attract followers looking for inspiring and energetic guidance leading to blind and hero followership which pleases the leader at the expense of the organizations long-term goals. Since they give emotional speeches to motivate subordinates, they can behave unethically while encouraging their followers to do the same (Saks & Ashforth, 2007). Charismatic leaders are examples to their own flock or employees. The trickle-down effect can only happen through charismatic leaders where employees take more of confidence, work attitude, higher personal expectations and optimism (Conger & Kanungo, 1987). The same employees will go along in becoming great leaders in places where somebody in-charge takes interest in promotion and growth. Besides, higher production is achieved since employees desire to attain the best (Schneider, Goldstein & Smith, 1995). The elements associated with low morale, low commitment and dissatisfaction will be eliminated. These are issues relate to absenteeism, poor attitudes, tardiness and below par work qualities. There will be a reduction in turnover as more is reaped and less expended on training (Shamir, House, & Arthur, (1993). Employees will have more in terms of company support during hardships and will be willing to stay in the company as long as the manager is good. Charismatic leaders tend to abuse power in situations where they are taking risks in handling innovations. Shamir (2001) reiterates that though they employ positive power in creating impact, others exploit the situation to become totalitarian and manipulate the circumstances for individual benefit. Dionne et al. (2004) note that they are blindly followed by their subordinates since they are convincing and inspiring instead of considering the long-term impact. Transformational leaders offer opportunities for growth by calling on positive attention to company owners and upper management. Promotional and growth opportunities will improve especially if the employees support the manager who has demonstrated quality and exceptional leadership skills (Yukl, 1999). Overall, charismatic leaders are cherished by many promotional opportunities and companies increase careers directed to customer contacts sales and in hospitality industry where people skills is treasured for organizational benefit (Saks & Ashforth, 2007; Keller, 2006). Success requires some level of charisma which is only embedded in transformational leaders who develop the influence into action. These leaders are potential of creating an atmosphere of teamwork where co-workers are able to create action that delivers the larger company vision (Conger & Kanungo, 1987). Inspirational motivation is needed where employees need encouragement for any real action to become a vision in reality. Individualized consideration is where every organization teach or enhance the skills needed for success in some kind through advising, coaching and mentoring. The leaders are challenged to fulfill and identify employee needs for a better organization (Shea & Howell, 1999). The aim is uncovering and leveraging critical skills needed for organizational vision. These leaders understand the motivations and needs of each employee. Salancik and Pfeffer (2008) note that charismatic leaders in most cases have their skills over relied making their followers to have a firm believe in them. They become role models and guides to propel confidence while they themselves lack appropriate character to instill desirable values among the followers. Transformational leaders take a generalized assumption that people readily follow what they are advocating which is not always the case. Many people may want to exercise their ideas and democratic ideals where the leader has a vision, vision communication and working based on commitment and trust (Shea & Howell, 1999). However, it is possible that the followers could have different opinions regarding the vision formulated. Integrity and character may be lacking in cases where they need to show concrete evidence to leaders’ decisions. It is also crucial to have facts that support the leader besides the inspiring workers else the power will be utilized for unscrupulous purposes. Yammarino et al. (2005) accepts that followers with adequate knowledge of their leader’s actions and values will most likely build trust. However, the values espoused by the leader may fail to align with the values of followers leading to conflict of interest destroying the trust bestowed on the leader by the followers (Bass & Avolio, 1994; Shea & Howell, 1999). Transformational leaders have intellectual stimulation which recognizes that lack of innovation and creativity will hinder long-term success. According to Conger and Kanungo (1987) these leaders encourage new ideas and refined approaches to problems existing in the organizations. Rather than punished, the challenging long held notions are encouraged. Charismatic leaders facilitate intellectual stimulation by consistently demanding better results and higher performance (Smircich & Morgan, 2002). They also provide the tools that are needed in meeting these challenges. In return, employees will respond with innovative solutions required for the organization to outshine competitors and exceed expectations. These leaders lack the skills and expertise to run organizations since they dismiss structural planning, documentation and organizational meetings and consistent assignments hence preventing the organization from attaining long-term stability and profitability. Festinger (2004) says that charismatic leaders reject dissenting views and as the company grows it becomes impractical to work with. The budget asking for financial back-up makes the company sustainable through project plans. Documentation and processes will look like extra work as the leader will demand results and not the viability of the budget, spending and investments (Bass & Avolio, 1994). Conclusion The purpose of the essay was to establish that transformational or charismatic leaders are the only leaders needed in the current organizational environment. The essay has affirmed that these leaders are indispensable and needed in the organization (Conger, 1999). Work environment that has low morale and high turnover is associated with difficult working conditions and managers who are unsupportive. It is obtained that charismatic leaders are key drivers to low sales and dwindling reputation. These are issues that grapple the modern organization. It goes without say that they leaders are not angels and are subject of internal discussion regarding their knowledge on systems and details. They also tend to abuse the power when they find the followership overwhelming (Kotter, 1990). Overall, the leader is invincible in challenging diminishing organizational vision and values. Charismatic leaders are therefore the only leaders needed in successful management and direction to contemporary organizational setup. References Bass, B., & Avolio, B. J. (Eds.). (1994). Improving organizational effectiveness through transformational leadership. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Bass, B. M. (1990). Bass & Stogdill's handbook of leadership: Theory, research, and managerial applications (Third ed.). New York, NY: The Free Press. Bono, J. E., & Judge, T.A. (2003). Self-concordance at work: Toward understanding the motivational effects of transformational leaders. Academy of Management Journal, 46: 554–571. Brown, M. E., & Trevino, L. K. (2006). Socialized charismatic leadership, values congruence, and deviance in work groups. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91: 954–962. Colbert, A. E., Kristof-Brown, A. L., Bradley, B. H., & Barrick, M. R. (2008). CEO transformational leadership: The role of goal importance congruence in top management teams. Academy of Management Journal, 51: 81–96. Conger, J. A. (1999). Charismatic and transformational leadership in organizations: An insider’s perspective on these developing streams of research. Leadership Quarterly, 10: 145–170. Conger, J. A., & Kanungo, R. N. (1987). Toward a behavioral theory of charismatic leadership in organizational settings. Academy of Management Review, 12: 637–647. Conger, J. A., and Kanungo, R. N., (2008). Charismatic leadership in organizations. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. DeChurch, L. A., & Mesmer-Magnus, J. R. (2010). The cognitive underpinnings of effective teamwork: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 95: 32–53. Dionne, S. D., Yammarino, F. J., Atwater, L. E., & Spangler, W. D. (2004). Transformational leadership and team performance. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 17(2): 177–193. Festinger, L. (2004). A theory of social comparison processes. Human Relations, 7: 117–140. Howell, J. M. (1988). Two faces of charisma: Socialized and personalized leadership in organizations. In J. A. Conger & R. N. Kanungo (Eds.), Charismatic leadership: The elusive factor in organizational effectiveness: 213–236. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Academy of Management Journal August Howell, J. M., & Shamir, B. (2005). The role of followers in the charismatic leadership process: Relationships and their consequences. Academy of Management Review, 30: 96–112. Kaiser, R. B., Hogan, R., & Craig, S. B. (2008). Leadership and the fate of organizations. American Psychologist, 63: 96–110. Kark, B., Shamir, B., and Chen, G. (2003). The two faces of transformational leadership: Empowerment and dependency. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88: 246-255. Keller, R. T. (1992). Transformational leadership and the performance of research and development project groups. Journal of Management, 18: 489–501. Keller, R. T. (2006).Transformational leadership, initiating structure, and substitutes for leadership: A longitudinal study of R&D project team performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91: 202–210. Klein, K. J., & House, R. J. (2005). On fire: Charismatic leadership and levels of analysis. Leadership Quarterly, 6: 183–198. Kotter, J. P. (1990). A force for change : how leadership differs from management. New York. Kudisch, J. D., Poteet, M. L., Dobbins, G. H., Rush, M. C., & Russell, J. E. A. (2005). Expert power, referent power, and charisma: Toward the resolution of a theoretical debate. Journal of Business and Psychology, 10: 177–195. Northouse, P. G. (2010). Leadership: Theory and Practice (Fifth ed.). Los Angeles, CA: SAGE. Piccolo, R. F., & Colquitt, J. A. (2006). Transformational leadership and job behaviors: The mediating role of core job characteristics. Academy of Management Journal, 49: 327-340. Raudenbush, S. W., & Bryk, A. S. (2002). Hierarchical linear models: Applications and data analysis methods (2nd ed.). Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Salancik, J., & Pfeffer, G. R. (2008). A social information processing approach to job attitudes and task design, Administrative Science Quarterly, 23: 224–253. Saks, A. M., & Ashforth, B. E. (2007). Longitudinal investigation of the relationships between job information sources, applicant perceptions of fit, and work outcomes. Personnel Psychology, 50: 395–426. Schneider, B., Goldstein, H. W., & Smith, D. B. (1995). The ASA framework: An update. Personnel Psychology,48: 747–773. Shamir, B. (2001). The charismatic relationship: Alternative explanations and predictions. Leadership Quarterly, 2: 81–104. Shamir, B., House, R., & Arthur, M. B. (1993). The motivational effects of charismatic leadership: A self-concept based theory. Organizational Science, 4:577–591. Shea, C. M., & Howell, J. M. (1999). Charismatic leadership and task feedback: A laboratory study of their effectson self-efficacy and task performance. Leadership Quarterly, 10: 375–396. Smircich, L., & Morgan, G. (2002). Leadership: The management of meaning. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 18: 257–273. Yammarino, F. J., Dionne, S. D., Chun, J. U., & Dansereau, F. (2005). Leadership and levels of analysis: A state-of- the-science review. Leadership Quarterly, 16:879–919. Yukl, G. A. (1999). An evaluation of conceptual weaknesses in transformational and charismatic leadership theories. Leadership Quarterly, 10: 285–305. Yukl, G. (2010). Leadership in Organizations (Seventh ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall. Read More