Effective Leadership Work in an Organization - Essay Example

Summary Leadership is not a new concept in management as the success of the managerial processes is largely dependent upon how effectively leadershipwork for the organization. How leadership emerge and what chracticerstics and behaviors are shown by the leaders is all contextual and can differ in various organizational set ups. Thus the leadership is mostly a contextual phenomenon which has emerged over the period of time through a time based evolution of the concept. It must however be noted that there is a subtle difference between what leadership is and what management is as both the concepts are often mis-interpreted. Leadership is the ability to provide vision to the organization where as management is the ability to put that vision into practice thus managerial roles follow leadership and do not take precedence. The earlier literature on leadership suggested that leadership is a process which emerge out of the in-born capabilities of the leaders thus it was concluded that the leaders are born and cannot be developed however later research suggested otherwise and put forward different theories of leadership which attempted to define it in different contexts as compared to the old school of thought on the leadership. The subsequent theories put forward an entirely different interpretation of the leadership and recent thoughts on leadership seems to have borrowed much from the leadership concepts of Religion such as Christianity and Buddhism as the leaders are now considered as servants and not someone with the absolute authority of punishing and rewarding the employees. Literature Review Leadership is one of the most important management concepts which have much different significance to the overall success of the business. It has always been argued that the success and failure of an organization largely depend upon the effectiveness of the leadership. The better the leadership is, the more successful the organization may be. Leadership is now considered as one of the most contemporary issues faced by both the businesses as well as the governments. It is important therefore for both the businesses as well as nations to have effective leaders who can provide a strategic vision to them. It has however always been discussed the sources and emergence of leadership and in this regard various theories have also been put forward which attempted to define what leadership is and how it emerges. Based on these theories and processes, there emerged different leadership styles suited to different organizations at different time and the process continue to evolve as literature on organizational leadership has greatly improved in terms of its orientation as well as scope as the subsequent studies have defined leadership from multiple perspectives and from a larger view of the different organizational frameworks. This literature review will undertake a detailed overview of the concepts of management as well as leadership and how both differentiate from each other and how they corroborate with each other in order to achieve success for the organization. What is leadership There is an ambiguity surrounding what we perceive as leadership and this factor also lead us to difficulties in teaching leadership also.(Barker,1997). Leadership is considered as a revitalizing and energizing force that is critical to the success of the organization.(Frank, Gertz & Porter, 1996). Thus leadership is something upon which the success and failure of the organization is largely dependent. However, what actually leadership is and how it emerges is still an undecided question as many research studies have attempted to define leadership from different perspectives. Peter Druker defined leadership as something which has followers whereas John C Maxwell defined it as nothing but sheer influence. (Thorson, 2005). Leadership can also be defined as "Leadership is a process by which a person influences others to accomplish an objective and directs the organization in a way that makes it more cohesive and coherent. Leaders carry out this process by applying their leadership attributes , such as beliefs, values, ethics, characters, knowledge and skills"(Thorson, 2005). This definition give leadership a much broader perspective as well as scope as it take into account different perspectives associated with the business and management such as accomplishment of objectives, directing the organization, influencing people to get things done and all this is done while maintaining the cohesive and coherent environment within the organization. The concept of leadership, within the organizational contexts is therefore largely oriented towards the organizational functioning as well as coordinating of the organizational activities.(Hollander, 1971). This interpretation however further narrows the gap between the leadership and management however which is not the case in its essence as later research has suggested a clear distinction between the two though there are some overlapping areas which are still to be decided whether they fall under the purview of leaders or managers. Contemporary thoughts on leadership suggest that the leadership does not necessarily revolves around the idea that it is largely dependent on the leader's knowledge, ability as well as styles or charisma however it has now been considered as a process which is largely related with multi-layered concept of the involvement of different agents in the form of followers thus it is now considered as collaborative endeavor rather than the singular effect of the leader's personality. This necessitated that the leadership is not just a singular leader but a web of leader and followers relationships which actually complete the flow of leadership in any organization. Leadership thus is a relational process involving the interactions of leaders, members as well as external stakeholders in the organization also. This also gives leadership a much broader scope of activities which broaden its influence in the organization in its overall direction and progress. It is often believed that leaders have the overall ability to define the direction for the organization thus the going concern of the organization largely depend upon the leadership. It is because of this reason that leadership of the organization has much bigger scope as well as the influence in setting up the whole direction of the organization. Leadership and Management It is believed that leadership and management go hand in hand as both are considered essential for the success of the organization. However it is argued that the ability to manage and lead is one of the qualities which distinguish leadership from the management.(Raush, 2003). Thus what is most important between the leadership and management is the fact that both corroborate each other however both are distinct in their scope too. Though managing and leading are two different tasks however managing is often considered as the byproduct of leadership as managers are those people who actually implement the strategies and vision of the leaders. In this regard the management is something which follows leadership as it basically implements what has been envisioned by the leadership of the organization. It also must be noted that the available literature on the topic have clearly distinguished leadership and management into different areas such followers-subordinates, work focus etc. It is believed that managers have subordinates however leaders have the followers. The basic difference between the two approaches is the fact that a leader can derive loyalty from his followers whereas a manager may not derive loyalty from her subordinates therefore the fundamental difference is the association of people with each of the above. As Peter Druker has described that leaders have followers that means that the loyalty which can be extracted by the leaders from their followers clearly make a difference for the organization as from it can usher the productivity as well as creativity and innovation from the followers. This also provide the added creativity to the organization as when loyalties are defined than there is also a creativity since employees tend to feel themselves as part of the organization. It also therefore must be noted that leadership is not task oriented as compared to the managers because leaders always provide strategies and vision and it is the job of the managers to carry on the responsibilities of implementing that strategy by suitably tailoring it according to the needs of various departments of the organization so that strategy is comprehensively put into action within the organization and a synergy is created out of it. A" study that showed managers as risk-averse, leaders appeared as risk-seeking, although they are not blind thrill-seekers. When pursuing their vision, they consider it natural to encounter problems and hurdles that must be overcome along the way. They are thus comfortable with risk and will see routes that others avoid as potential opportunities for advantage and will happily break rules in order to get things done. A surprising number of these leaders had some form of handicap in their lives which they had to overcome. Some had traumatic childhoods, some had problems such as dyslexia, others were shorter than average. This perhaps taught them the independence of mind that is needed to go out on a limb and not worry about what others are thinking about you."(www.changingminds.org, 2008). This risk taking behavior leads us to understand and analyze the leadership behaviors. The subsequent section will discuss the various leadership behaviors and characteristics. Leadership Behaviors and Characteristics Many of the research studies focused on the character of the leaders as one of the most important ingredient which shapes the success of the leaders.(Sarros, Cooper &Hartican, 2006). It is believed that the ability of the leader to do the right thing despite outside pressures is what is significantly unique into the leaders that make them more better managers also as their ability to take decisions despite all the odds is what makes leaders successful. Sarros, Cooper and Hartican are of the view that the character is the moral choices that we make and given the corporate scandals of Enron and WorldCom it has now aggressively being felt that leadership of the organization if devoid of the essential character to lead the organization can lead it to its failure rather than success as in the case of Enron and WorldCom. Further studies on the leadership also suggest that emotional intelligence of the leaders is one of the most essential characteristics which define their success. Goleman is of the view that emotional intelligence is the better predictor of the success of the leaders rather than their IQ as measured commonly. Thus what is most important here is the fact that emotional intelligence defines the ability of the leader "to be aware of, manage and use emotions appropriately in dealing with people in various situations."(Goleman, 1996). This emotional intelligence, in modern literature is therefore considered as one of the most important behaviors of the leaders and as an essential characteristic which re-enforces the leadership beliefs and attitudes within the organization. It is also believed that the leaders also exhibit a sense of transformational attitudes. The transformational attitudes and characteristics of the leaders are critical to gain the loyalty within the organization. As discussed above that a leader derives loyalty from her followers therefore what is critical here is the fact that leaders must also has the ability to transform their followers. By doing so they actually ensure that they are not only creating a sense of association with the organization but also ensuring the smooth relationship between the employees and the organization as it should have been developed. However transformational qualities cannot emerge into the leader until and unless he or she has the required charisma. Leadership has been considered as a process which actually emerges out of the charisma. Charisma has been described as the personal power of the person which derives so much power that it attracts people attention and hence helps individuals to emerge as leaders. (Conger & Kanungo, 1987). Max Webber was one of the earliest proponents of the Charisma as valid leadership characteristics when he described that the Charisma give the leaders the necessary legitimacy into the organization and provide leaders and opportunity to derive power not out of the organizational power such as ability to punish and reward but out of the sheer personal aura of the leader. It is because of this reason that it is considered that the Charisma is one of the most important variables which actually decide the origin of the leadership and from where it emerged. (Conger & Kanungo, 1987). However it must also be noted that the research studies have defined Charisma, as a characteristic of the leadership in different contexts. The use of Charisma as the leadership characteristic is dependent on the way it is being used i.e. its contextual use. Therefore charisma may not be considered single handedly as the most important behavior of the leaders until and unless used within the contextual meaning of the leadership style. Max Webber was one of the earliest researchers who concentrated on the Charisma as a valid leadership characteristics. However the concepts which Webber put forwards were both secular as well as religious in nature as he believed that institutionalization of the Charisma depend upon the heredity, kinship as well as office. This particular explanation however give credibility to the claims that Charisma emerge mostly into the family owned business as long established traditional family business values give the leaders the traditional superiority over others in different organizational and management set ups. The often quoted example is that of the Wal-Mart where the Walton family has been one of the key instruments behind the success of the business. Overall the Charisma is considered as one of the most important characteristics of the leadership and often leads us to the question of the origin of the leadership and from where it emerges. How Leadership emerge There is different explanation of how the leadership emerges within the organizational contexts. Many research studies have defined it in different way. The emergence of Industrial revolution in West is often considered as the starting point for the start of the modern management practices as well as the leadership. Since then there have been different attempts made which defined the leadership in different contexts. Thus the earliest theories on this topic of management focused on the assumption that leadership qualities are in-born into the leaders and leaders are born leaders and they cannot be developed or trained to be the leaders.(Horner, 1997). However the later research focused on the contextual emergence of leadership and concluded that the leadership emerges out of the situations and it is not necessary that the leaders should be born. This interpretation gave rise to the situational leadership theories. However, as we have defined above the characteristics and behaviors of the leadership thus the effort has also been made to define the emergence of leadership as a process of the personal traits of the leaders such as the leadership has been defined as the phenomenon which has emerged out of the personal traits and characteristics of the leaders. The recent debates however are focused on the transformational leadership as well as servant leaders - a concept which has been borrowed from Christianity and attempt to redefine the role of leaders as the servants and not as someone with power and authority to punish and reward. References Frank. Ronald, Gertz. Dwight, Porter, John. (1996). Leadership for growth. Strategy & Leadership;. 24 (5), 1-6. horson. (2005). What is Leadership. Available: http://www.med.umich.edu/csp/Course%20materials/Fall%202005/Thorson_What%20is%20Leadership.ppt.. Last accessed 20 July 2008. Barker R. (1997). How can we train leaders if we dont know what leadership is. Human Relations. 5 (4), p343-62. www.changingminds.org. (2008). Leadership vs Management. Available: http://www.changingminds.org/disciplines/leadership/articles/manager_leader.htm. Last accessed 20th July 2008. James C. Sarros, Brian K. Cooper,Anne M. Hartican. (1997). Leadership and character. Leadership & Organization Development Journal. 27 (8), p682-99. Goleman D (1996). Emotional Intelligence. London: Bloomsburry. Hollander, E. P. (1971). Style, Structure, and Setting in Organizational Leadership. Administrative Science Quarterly , 16 (1), 1-9. Horner, M. (1997). Leadership theory: past, present and future. Team Performance Management , 3 (4), 270-287. Conger, J. A., & Kanungo, R. N. (1987). Toward a Behavioral Theory of Charismatic Leadership in Organizational Settings. The Academy of Management Review , 12 (4), 637-67. Read More