Identification with Theory, Relating with Practice - Assignment Example

Identification with Theory, Relating with Practice Introduction Leadership in today’s organisations seems to be combined with the utilisation of different team-based concepts and behavioural modification on behalf of managers in order to create a more unified, socially-coherent organisation. Research evidence suggests that there must be specific personality-related characteristics present in order to facilitate learning in the modern organisation as well as inspiration and an educational understanding of what drives group dynamics. As previous researchers have devoted a significant amount of time to understanding these principles associated with organisational activities, there is a clear pattern that today’s businesses and other organisations are looking for leaders who can achieve unity and a common sense of purpose in the environment. This paper takes a personal reflective viewpoint about the nature of the organisation and leaders within it, applying it to potential real-world situations to give various theories deeper meaning. A review of organisational principles To begin this reflective journey, one project management expert suggests that “if you cannot get people to use their skills appropriately, they are of little use to the project” (Gehring, 2007, p.45). The author is offering that it is the role of leadership (or management) intervention in order to allocate the right organisational staff member for the specific function as it contributes to a group or team project. This is something which I connected with strongly during the course of this programme, especially in academic environments where group work and team-based projects are commonplace. The class learned about different motivational theories which will be discussed later, however it is important to recognise that if the right talents are not aligned for the right project, there is likely to be disorder in a project group or lack of efficiency. I think this is important to recognise, as a future business leader, that sometimes keeping efficiency and productivity is simply about designing a project, group or organisational structure with the perfect fit of talent. For example, the author suggests that in projects, managers must realise that the temporary nature of projects is that they are short-lived and do not allow for ongoing leadership improvement (Gehring). Therefore, it would seem that a qualified leader must be well-developed with the fundamental understanding of how to structure groups to ensure that conflict is reduced as much as possible. Because the leader will not be able to utilise theory of group development over an extended period of time, this also suggests a rapid decision-maker who is confident in their assessments and determinations. This is supported by Stogdill, from course learning, as a research redevelopment of trait theory, who suggests self-confidence as a main leadership capability. There is also evidence that employee misconduct, in the organisation, is on the rise in the form of detrimental behaviours, anti-social behaviours, and counter-productive behaviours (Kidder, 205, p.390). Again, if there are going to be situations in the workplace where different behavioural modification techniques are required or the staff members are engaged in counter-productive activities, there seems to be a need for leaders who can ensure that these conflict scenarios are handled in a method appropriate for the environment. Strang (2005) offers that transactional leadership might be appropriate for this situation where employee misconduct requires addressing as it is linked to reward and authority. It seems that the transactional leader is one who can clearly take an authoritarian posture to address employee counter-productive behaviours and also address how the employee can be adequately rewarded if they change or modify these behaviours. Reflectively, linking reward with authority is something which I experience regularly when dealing with academic instructors and various school administration. A transactional leader balances authority with reward and provides specific outcomes in the event of poor achievement or in-class social disruption. It made me consider that when facing certain classroom behavioural guidelines, motivation to perform to higher standards is raised as the student. This made me consider that many of the theories of motivation and leadership, which show the importance of blending authoritarianism with a softer human resources focus, seem to be characteristic of basic human behaviour and would be effective in schools, businesses and other structured organisations. There is also evidence that in the real-life organisational environment, there is going to be some level of senior leadership assessing various risk scenarios. Oxelheim and Wihlborg (1997) offer that risk refers to potential impacts on a company’s cash flow, profitability, or overall value. With this in mind, today’s team-based organisations are likely going to consider the human resources aspects on minimising risk and will therefore require leaders who can identify those organisational staff members who can best contribute to long-term goals and those who cannot or will not contribute effectively. Though non-performing staff will likely either be phased out or trained to promote better motivation and performance, the integral leader creates a vision and inspires the performers to follow this vision (Volckmann, 2005). From a softer perspective on leadership, the author suggests integral leaders “know more, see more, and provide guidance to others who want to move forward” (Volckmann, 2005, p.14). This is a recurring theme in coursework learning: The group dynamic and vision. I decided to blend business risk when comparing real-life situations because as any business manager, there is going to be extended duties related to securing company value. At the same time, a leader must drive performance through tactics which best fit the expectations of subordinate staff members. In the academic environment, I encounter those students who want to provide minimal contribution to a team effort and create inefficiency in meeting deadlines or providing quality work to the instructor. Course concepts about using vision to inspire others to become more motivated and contributing, such as going above and beyond equity theory to influence others as a means of dealing with non-contributing student conflicts. It also seems that today’s leader should have the ability to regulate emotional responses to situations, which is referred to as pro-social behaviours (Bierhoff and Muller, 2005). This is a leader who can adjust their mood and project positive charisma into the group atmosphere to induce performance. Since leadership is about attaining the desire in workers to achieve success, then emotional consistency is likely going to be expected of various individuals or teams. This would seem to be a rather common sense assessment, however since personality-based leader attributes seem be on the forefront of how to motivate others to perform, it speaks strongly to the ability to curb non-supportive behaviours even in the face of difficult group environments. It all seems to go back toward vision and inspiration. The coursework taught the class that people in organisations seem to perform better when they have difficult, yet clearly-outlined goals. However, at the same time, they appear to need the presence of an emotionally-consistent visionary to be fully motivated. This was discussed because in organisations, there does not seem to be a singular, definitive model which best describes how to lead and how to inspire a genuine desire to achieve. In society, there are always going to be individuals who are inherently non-contributory or leaders who are non-supportive or even emotionally-explosive. This made me consider my personal life and all of the conflicts in general society in households and in business organisations. These environments are filled with diverse attitudes, beliefs and motivational values, however each environment likely has a personal goal or mission to achieve. I believe that I have gained the ability, through course lessons, to rationalise all of the key players in a group dynamic, assess their talents and weaknesses, and then inject the appropriate prosocial personality to build team unity and avoid conflict scenarios. Further related to groups, a recent research study exploring the dynamics of conflict resolution in the organisation identified that cooperative philosophy fosters team performance (Somech, Desivilya and Lidogoster, 2009). Conflict, in virtually any social situation, is a likely outcome when different personalities and demographics interact. The cooperative conflict management approach seems to be one which focuses on task interdependency as somewhat of a mediator between conflicting parties who works to create win-win scenarios in order to reduce non-productive social disruption to group projects or team-based job roles. The coursework taught us that strategies for reducing conflict involve focusing on collaboration and integrative bargaining so there would seem to be a genuine need for leaders who can manage conflict in this manner. I experience conflict routinely both as a student and as a community citizen. I regularly negotiate and interact with a broad cross-section of the community in activities as simple as shopping for household products or discussing a grading conflict with an instructor. It made me consider that some of the most effective solutions to situations arise from having win-win outcomes of discussions, such as a grade being changed due to student protest so long as the student promises superior, future in-class performance. I generally have a difficult time in conflict situations and tend to avoid them, therefore based on the motivational concepts we were exposed to in the course I thought that I would take a more cooperative, interdependency focused view on handling small-scale conflict scenarios in my life. Abraham Maslow identified his five-tiered hierarchy of needs which suggests that most basic needs, such as the physiological and security needs, must be secured before an individual can contribute to their maximum potential in the organisation (Morris and Maisto, 2005). Motivation seems to be the cornerstone of the majority of all business performance and ability to reach its long-term goals. But how does one motivate in today’s real-world environments? Joshi, Lazarova and Liao (2009) offer that motivation is a product of inspiration and leaders who develop stronger social relationships with group members. Inspirational organisations, under these authors’ premise, are those who can create shared group perceptions of commitment and trust. Inspiration was also cited as a significant predictor of commitment to the team (Joshi et al). Inspiration is clearly needed in a wide variety of organisational scenarios in order to boost motivational levels. Reflectively, in business and personal life, I rarely come across individuals with inspirational personalities. I also have problems with motivation in certain areas of my life. Because the literature points so strongly toward the need for motivation through inspiration, it made me consider that, perhaps, some organisations are missing the most obvious when trying to build motivation and inter-group performance: Motivation is built on inspiration once the employee perceives a worthwhile structure and the procurement of social and psychological needs. This would seem to be beneficial to peers, instructors, organisational leaders and even general society. However, how would a manager inspire when their duties to the organisation are “fragmented, episodic, and verbal with managers spending time grappling with immediate crisis issues” (Brotheridge and Long, 2007, p.832). There is clearly evidence that the role of leader or manager is one where extended, organisational obligations are going to be present in the day-to-day function of this role. When does the leader find time to inspire when dealing with various non-personnel-related issues? It would also seem that an effective organisational leadership hierarchy understands how to structure leader roles to allow more time to connect with group or team members. Inspiration does not seem to be an emotional response which is simply created out of thin air, instead it seems to be built on specific leadership talents and interventions to create unity of vision and purpose. It is clearly about making connection with people while still balancing the responsibilities of an organisational controller. I have found that instructors build more of my confidence when they are interactive and not just acting out a curriculum obligation hoping for student retention and involvement. I have also found this in social situations where after a time, friends who do not stay involved are eventually phased out of group unity. This made me consider the importance of coalitions for building power which was discussed in the coursework and how lack of unity, or an individual who does not stay properly connected, can disrupt the level of power of a group leader. A group can only resolve internal conflicts and achieve top performance if individual group members are able to resolve their personal conflicts related to their boundaries in the group (Akrivou, Boyatzis and McLeod, 2006). What is meant by boundaries? In certain team projects and group environments, there is likely going to be some team members who are at lower-levels of the organisational hierarchy and those who do not maintain the expertise for more advanced group discussions. This is likely going to create a situation in which the individual has hidden and transparent problems with the boundaries set for them, such as not being invited to all group meetings or other relevant situations, causing them to focus on their boundaries rather than their personal contribution to the team efforts. In this situation, the individual would not seem to have their basic needs being met, such as social belonging, and would therefore not be willing to contribute until they have resolved this issue. This also reinforces the importance of different theories of power and conflict negotiation when dealing with people and their complicated sociological and psychological expectations. In life, there are always boundaries and sometimes people have to accept this as a professional. It made me consider the absolute importance of understanding how to recognise when power struggles are occurring in different group environments and how to effectively regain control when boundary-related issues arise. Because the coursework taught the teams fail because members often do not consider how they will work together effectively, it made me consider the absolute value of regulating boundary conflict issues and to draw on concepts of the group dynamic to ensure team success; whether in school or an organisation. Consider an organisational staff member who has the aforementioned problem with boundaries in team projects. If this individual is harboring considerable animosity for being a limited contributor to the group, will they attempt to sabotage the group? Will the individual simply provide the minimum required of their team role and avoid over-contribution due to feelings of animosity? It has been mentioned that adult learning in the organisation is life-centered, as identified in course learning, which essentially means that people assess their environments and scenarios in terms of sociological and psychological issues related to the self. Group effectiveness, upon reflection, would seem to rely on setting clear boundaries as well for each individual and discussing these ahead of time to prevent misconceptions about power and authority within the group. Using this philosophy, if it were effective, would be considerably-helpful in personal life when family or peer projects have undefined social rules and different goals. I might assess, through our course learning, that effectiveness begins with setting the scope of group affiliation early on during the course of collaboration to avoid conflict. Interesting to this journey is the professional recognition that when conflict occurs in a group environment, the immediate effect is the “cognitive and affective responses of group members” (Ayoko and Hartel, 2006, p.345). These specific reactions creates a cycle of either productive or destructive conflict, with these cycles eventually impacting group social cohesion or task motivation over time (Ayoko and Hartel). So what does this really mean to the organisation today? It seems that in groups, individual responses or contributions are going to be perceived differently by group members based on their own life-centered learning styles. If one member of the group strongly values professionalism whilst a presenter in the group utilises excess humor to build inspiration and commitment, a conflict between the two radically-different personalities might be created. Even if they are not transparent, sociological rifts are likely going to create complications in moving group projects or team efforts forward. This again made me consider the course lessons and how often we deal with group conflict on virtually a daily basis. People are consistently, it would seem, assessing their peers and the group environment to find its value for them, specifically, as a primary goal. If goals and values are not congruent, conflict in some form begins. It made me think that, perhaps, destructive group conflict can be avoided simply by discussing commonalities of purpose and personality prior to discussing work outcomes. This would satisfy the life-centred expectations and create group cohesion. I will attempt this in the next student group project when I suspect it might be unproductive based on conflicting group values and beliefs. Conclusion All of the information provided has created a new portrait of what might be required of effective organisational leadership today. There is clearly a sociological dimension regarding how individuals view themselves and others, with judgments consistently being made at the psychological level as the catalyst for responses such as motivation or non-productive work behaviours. I have realised that there is a strong need for people who can take a leadership role, recognise the political and social outcomes which may occur as a result of group orientation, adapt as necessary to crises in group scenarios, whilst also providing superior inspirational and charismatic personality attributes. There is also the need to balance authoritarianism with reward strategies in order to build higher levels of commitment to vision or organisational mission. The organisation today, in my informed opinion, is quite complicated with such a wide variety of variables and human behavioural components that no singular model of motivation or group effectiveness would seem to work at all organisations. Structure of the business, along with the philosophy toward how to secure staff needs, seem to also be some of the most fundamental catalysts for whether or not high levels of performance are reached. The understandings which have come from this learning experience speak highly toward the need for leaders who are flexible, adaptable, able to assess social scenarios and respond quickly, and work toward motivating team unity and collaboration. The lessons learned about group dynamics, motivation, and power through organisation will positively impact my personal and academic ambitions as well as my future professional role as an organisational leader. Bibliography Akrivou, Kleio and Boyatzis, Richard E. (2006). The evolving group: Towards a prescriptive theory of intentional group development. The Journal of Management Development. Bradford. 25(7), p.689. Ayoko, O. and Hartel, C.E. (2006). Cultural diversity and leadership: A conceptual model of leader intervention in conflict events in culturally heterogeneous workgroups. Cross-Cultural Management, Patrington. 13(4), p.345. Bierhoff, H. and Muller, G.F. (2005). Leadership, mood, atmosphere, and cooperative support in project groups. Journal of Managerial Psychology, Bradford. 20(5/6), pp.483-498. Brotheridge, Celeste M. (2007). The real-world challenges of managers: Implications for management education. The Journal of Management Development, Bradford. 26(9), p.832. Gehring, Dean R. (2007). Applying traits theory of leadership to project management. Project Management Journal, Sylva. 38(1), p.44-56. Ebsco Database. Retrieved 20 Apr 2009. Kidder, Deborah L. (2005). It is ‘who I am’, ‘what I can get away with’, or ‘what you’ve done to me’? A multi-theory examination of employee misconduct. Journal of Business Ethics. Vol. 57. Oxelheim, Lars and Wihlborg, Clas. (1997). Managing in the Turbulent World Economy: Corporate Performance and Risk Exposure. Chichester, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Strang, Kenneth D. (2005). Examining effective and ineffective transformational project leadership. Team Performance Management, Bradford. 11(3/4), pp.68-80. Somech, A., Desivilya, H. and Lidogoster, H. (2009). Team conflict management and team effectiveness: The effects of task interdependence and team identification. Journal of Organizational Behavior, Chichester. 30(3), p.359. Joshi, A., Lazarova, M. and Liao, H. (2009). Getting everyone on board: The role of Inspirational leadership in geographically dispersed teams. Organization Science. Linthicum. 20(1), pp.240-255. Morris, Charles and Maisto, Albert. (2005). Psychology: An Introduction, 12th ed. Pearson Prentice Hall. Volckmann, Russ. (2005). Assessing executive leadership: An internal approach. Journal of Organizational Change Management, Bradford. 18(3), pp.289-301. Read More