Does Strong Leadership Lead to Business Success - Essay Example

Management Assignment 2 Name: Institution: Date: Does strong leadership lead to business success? Introduction Bad leadership perpetrated through abusive supervision can lead to diminished intrinsic motivation of employees hence giving a blow to job satisfaction (Liu, Liao & Loi, 2012). Transformation leaders through providing direction to teams within the organization shape the vision and strategic goal of the organization as demonstrated by Fineman and Grabriel (2013) in their study. This essay will argue the significance of strong leadership to the success of the business while demonstration contexts where the self-interest of a strong leader can derail the strategic goals of the organization. Strong leaders do not have to take advantage of the situation for their own personal interests. Drawing from the narratives from the Gabriel’s research (1997) the fantasies that subordinates have about their leaders can be vividly understood. The expectation about leaders as being superhuman is not necessarily true and sometimes an encounter with a leader can end up in an anticlimax. Different subordinates have different and unique encounters when they meet the leader in the organization. Strong leaders have a great role in shaping the perception of followers towards the fulfillment of the organizational goals. Discussion Leaders have for a long time been viewed as crucial contextual factors that stifles or cultivate employee creativity. Although limited, a growing empirical body of abusive supervisions research demonstrates that being exposed to abusive supervision can occasion the unwillingness of subordinates to sacrifice more to perform duties that are beneficial to their organization which may entail coming up with creative solutions and ideas that result into organizational effectiveness. The supervision of the team leader that is abusive can result into undermining the creativity of the team member since it reduces the intrinsic motivation of the team member. This refers to the level at which an employee partakes an activity for the sake of his enjoyment and interest in the activity, as opposed to the result of external rewards and pressures (Gabriel, 1997). Intrinsic motivation is important to creativity since the more intrinsically motivated the employees are towards their jobs, the mostly likely they are to challenge the status quo, create useful and novel ideas. Leaders can mistreat the subordinates with the aim of increasing subordinate performance, contrary; leaders can use abusive supervision for the purpose of harming their subordinates. The negative aspect of strong leadership has to be acknowledged although success of the organization depends on the types of leaders it has. Abusive leadership through supervision can affect grossly the performance of an organization. When team members come across abuse perpetuated by leaders in the form of derogating comments, public criticism, angry and loud tantrums, inconsiderate actions, and rudeness, they are quick to feel undermined, humiliated, and belittled as far as their workplace reputation is concerned. Abusive supervision also make subordinates to doubt if organizations count their contributions as important and whether their responsibility make any sense to the development of the organization and their own. Abusive supervision can lead to employees feeling unsatisfied with their jobs and contemplating quitting (Liu, Liao & Loi, 2012). Enjoyment of the job by the employee is reduced through abusive supervision. Reduced intrinsic motivation does not bring satisfaction to the employees. People in organization spend a lot of time fantasizing about their leaders. Meeting the top most leaders in the organization tests these fantasies, derailing others while reinforcing others. Some subordinates require the inspiration of their leaders in order to take on challenging tasks. Reassurance and inspiration is drawn from leaders who are thought to have superhuman qualities that qualify them to lead organizations. One of the auras or images projected by organizational leaders is that of omnipotence. This expectation is consciously reinforced by the leaders themselves although followers project very exceptional powers on them. The realization that leaders are only human can lead to unsettling feelings (Fineman & Grabriel, 2013). Business globalization has far-reaching consequences for the constitutional elements of leadership that comprise of the involved persons, their interaction, as well as the resulting influence together with their common goal. Leaders are persistently confronted by heterogeneous cultural contexts that do not have legal frameworks or shared moral orientations. As ethical or moral conflicts come up in the economic activities’ process, business leaders are left devoid of any orientation concerning adequate action that is moral. In such circumstances, the value maximization idea usually becomes the surrogate for any moral principles. While leaders interact with external stakeholders, the aspect of influence based on hierarchical power has to be re-evaluated. It has to be demonstrated what kind of legitimate influence accommodates such a context (Voegtlin, Patzer & Scherer, 2012). Corporate leaders have the obligation of mediating financial and social goals without revealing one or the other while maintaining corporate legitimacy, producing social capital, and building trust. Leaders within the organization have a huge responsibility bestowed on them. They provide direction for their followers and the institution ends up attaining its mission through its vision. Leaders have to think about the consequences of their action for all functions that would be affected. There is the heart of emotional connection between the follower and the leader in any organization. It portrays the immense power that leaders have vested in their followers’ eyes and the disturbing impact emanating from the realization that they are fallible after all. Leaders who inspire commitment, faith and awe are regarded as mortals and transform to targets for excessive contempt and hostility. The realization that the leader is not omnipotent undermines his ability to protect the subordinates by standing up on their behalf (Fineman & Grabriel, 2013). The weakness of the leader makes the subordinate to feel vulnerable and utterly exposed. It makes them feel betrayed as if they had their trust in the wrong person like a false prophet. Leaders have to be endowed with superhuman qualities since only then will they be perceives as real leaders that can be respected and accepted by all. To command such respect, a leader has to stand out. Meeting the leader of the organization does not have to be inspiring or terrifying. Such meetings, whether accidental or planned, can actually end in a disappointment or anticlimax that leaves a bitter aftertaste as demonstrated by some followers. A leader who cares less denies his followers the fulfillment of a significant need apart from forcing them to face their dependency and cast a huge blow to their pride. There is a connection between the psychological needs of subordinates and effective leadership. Transformational leaders cater for the needs of their followers and provide avenues of their fulfillment. Transactional leaders on the other hand, improve the performance of the organization through striking clever deals and ensuring things are effectively organized in the institution. This distinction has been the foundation of differentiating between leaders and managers. Some studies argue that managers ‘do things right’ while leaders do the ‘right things’ (Fineman & Grabriel, 2013). Studies have further demonstrated that subordinates integrate their leaders into their fantasy lives, associating them with strong characteristics which were earlier identified with parents, as well as other figures of authority. Many groups stick together by means of shared identification of the members with the leader. This identification portrays qualities to either being in love or being under hypnosis or both. The concept of charismatic leadership by Max Weber has elaborated many characteristics of leadership relation, encompassing idealization: the similarities between being in love and devotion to a leader (Fineman & Grabriel, 2013). Consequently strong leadership has an impact the success of the business since it influence the behavior and commitment of the subordinates who are either in love with the leader and idealizes him or hates him and loathe his leadership qualities and approach. Whereas the ethical aspects of transformational leadership have elicited immense attention, very little has been said with regard reactions of followers to the immoral and moral conduct of transformational leaders. Where there are abundant wrongdoings in the organization, it is more often than not that leaders who had been hitherto been heaped with praises of being transformational and visionary play a significant role (Jonnergard, Stafsudd & Elg, 2009). While transformational leaders have often been viewed as a leadership behavior that emphasizes and considers ethical standards, numerous researchers have questioned its inherent morality. Transformational leadership behaviors like role modeling, inspiration and vision, do not have to be applied in the in the perspective of the common good. These behaviors appear to be equally effective in pursuing immoral purposes, as well as to increase the personal power and the leaders’ status (Schuh, Zhang & Tian, 2013). Transformational qualities are morally neutral and whether they are used for bad or good depends on the intentions of the leader. Transformational leadership model has had a great impact on the current understanding of leadership effectiveness. Researchers on leadership have identified behaviors that represent this leadership style. The most evident one is the articulation of a vision that is compelling. This behavior defines the leaders who present an appealing picture for the organization’s future and who inspire their followers through identifying opportunities that are attractive for the group. Through doing this, they demonstrate a strong sense of purpose and excite members though applying image-based and persuasive rhetoric. Transformational leadership is also associated with the behavior of charismatic role modeling. Apart from influencing their followers, transformational leaders encourage their subordinates to work as a team in their work and to strive jointly towards the target goal. They lead to the creation of a sense of identification within the subordinates that in turn enhance the acceptance their proposed vision for the organization. Many studies have evaluated transformational leadership behaviors and have shown their effectiveness in shaping the efforts of their followers. Nevertheless, one vexing aspect of these behaviors is that they freely pursue morally bad and good goals. For instance, skills for communicating a vision that is compelling can be used to motivate followers to focus on collectively benefitting ends (Schuh, Zhang & Tian, 2013). On the other hand, they can also be applied in fostering the status and power of the leader. The gifts of consideration, inspiration, intellectual strength and charisma can be adequately abused for the leader’s self-interest. Hence there is a dark side of transformational leadership that includes undesirable personality traits that are associated with transformational behaviors. Provided that transformational behaviors appear to be equivocal as far as intentions of leaders are concerned, followers have to rely on additional cues if they try to interpret the motives of their leaders. According to the emphasis of attribution theory people look for signals and information that will elaborate the intention leading to certain behaviors. The theory explains that people experience an urge to make sense of the motives of other people since getting to know why someone acts in a particular manner reduces chances of uncertainty and permits the prediction of what will happen in future (Maeques, 2013). This is very important in the leader-follower relationship provided that followers rely on their leaders in order to access certain required resources. Attributions with regard to the behavior of another person impact strongly on how people react to and evaluate the person. The same behavior can result in negative or positive reactions depending on the underlying motive of the behavior. Whereas there is a developing literature concerning leadership efficacy at the level of an individual, there is a lot that can be learned concerning ways in which leadership efficacy patterns unfold at the team level (Quigley, 2013). This is important because teams are used often in the management of simulations and classrooms. Strong leaders have a great impact in the organization and help in shaping the vision of that organization. The behaviors of transformational leadership in most cases will elicit attributional search in the subordinates. The main purpose is observed in the more often than not unconventional nature of behaviors of transformational leadership. For example, in an effort to give direction to their team, transformational leaders come up with detailed visionary message instead of designing short-term goals. In the process, they apply metaphoric symbols and language to pass their passage across while leaders who are not transformational will depend on facts and numbers. Besides, transformational leaders portray positive emotions and enthusiasm in their communication with the employees while leaders who are less charismatic only apply a factual tone while addressing their subordinates (Crossan et al, 2013). Hence the behaviors of transformational leaders are referred to as extraordinary. Leaders in the United Kingdom pride themselves in their intelligence, rationale, and smartness and often overlook soft skill as being inappropriate in the work environments. Whereas they really want to be successful in their performance, thy openly resent adoption and recognition of soft skills as an appropriate approach to other rewarding outcomes. Even in circumstances where they are presented by feedback from co-workers concerning their behavior, they often blame the respondent offering the feedback as poorly focused and incompetent, or reach the conclusion that a wrong benchmark must have been applied (Maeques, 2013). Workers in an organization need influence and direction from a strong leader with adorable qualities. However, it should not be forgotten that the leaders are human and that they can make mistakes like other employees in the organization. The influence of leaders in shaping the vision of the organization is very important in the long run. Conclusion Strong leaders have a role to play in shaping the future of organization and the eventually success that is realized in the process. Leaders and managers have different roles that they play within the organization. Transformational leaders through providing direction end up shaping the vision of the organization but may neglect short-term goals. With proper utilization of power and influence, strong leaders can make the organization realize its success. Leaders serving their own self-interest can derail the vision of the organization leading to poor performance. Abusive supervision is a form of behavior that diminishes intrinsic motivation leading to lack of morale and under-performance. All in all strong leaders can guide a business to success. References Crossan, M., Mazutis, D., Seijts, G., & Gandz, J. (2013). Developing leadership character in business programs, Academy of Management Learning & Education 12 (2): 285-305. Fineman, S., & Grabriel, Y. (2013). Experiencing Organizations, Thousand Oaks CA, Sage Publications. Gabriel, Y. (1997). When organization members come face to face with supreme leader, Human Relations 50 (4): 315-342. Jonnergard, K., Stafsudd, A., & Elg, U. (2009). Performance evaluations as gender barriers in professional organizations: A study of Auditing firms, Gender, Work and Organization 17 (6): 721-748. Liu, D., Liao, H., & Loi, R. (2012). The Dark side of leadership: A three-level investigation of the cascading effect of abusive supervision on employee creativity, Academy of Management Journal 55 (5): 1187-1212. Maeques, J. (2013). Understanding the strength of Gentleness: Soft-skilled leadership on the rise, J Bus Ethics 116: 163-171. Quigley, N.R. (2013). A longitudinal, Multilevel study of leadership efficacy development in MBA Teams, Academy of Management Learning & Education 12 (4): 579-802. Schuh, S., Zhang, X., & Tian, P. (2013). For the Good of the Bad? Interactive Effects of Transformational Leadership with Moral and Authoritarian Leadership Behavior, Journal of Business Ethics, 166: 629-640. Voegtlin, C., Patzer, M., & Scherer, G.A. (2012), Responsible leadership in Global business: A new approach to leadership and its multi-level outcomes, J Bus Ethics 105: 1-16. Read More