Leadership and Organizational Development - Essay Example

Leadership and Organizational development Introduction Modern leadership has become more complex than ever before. In today’s organization, success, sustainability and growth can only be achieved through effective individual leadership apart from the development of leadership potential within each member of the team. This requires one to gain insights into inherent strengths and weaknesses and creating a plan that can help leverage these strengths with positive performance through appropriate and timely feedback and a relevant action plan to help enhance the requisite skills necessary for success and growth. A leader can only develop others through positive practices that lay a strong emphasis on individual engagement, develop social connections and encourage better performance driven by strengths and competencies. Developing this positive perspective aids a leader in steering the organization through the most complex challenges and delivers the required results. Competency in leadership A competency can be attributed to any special skill, ability or strength that can be developed, taught or inculcated in an individual. Any competency can be studied through relevant indicators that facilitates their assessment and measurement. Most companies today consider leadership as a competency that can be developed over time and follow an appropriate model in achieving this. Consider the case of General Electric (GE), one of the world’s largest organizations, that employs over 300,000 people (Emily Morrison, 2001). The company follows a stringent appraisal process that intends to groom its leader of tomorrow through constant training and evaluation. Any member who is found to be underperforming is eliminated immediately irrespective of previous track record. In evaluating its employees, GE follows an established leadership competency framework that groups individual competencies and links them to excellence in leadership capabilities. This approach has helped GE and several other organizations in evolving a long-term vision of their goals, helping define a concrete strategy that can help identify, develop and assess future leaders who will guide the company towards further success (Stephen Covey, 2008). There are numerous methods to create such a competency model. One traditional method is to conduct interviews with organizational leaders and decision makers in understanding the specific skills and knowledge that they believe important for success. The data from such interviews is then analyzed to determine critical leadership factor that can ultimately parameterize the competency model being constructed (Richard Hatala, 2003). Another way of developing leadership competencies is to arrange meetings between leaders and debate over the work culture, strategy and general expectations among members of the organization. Competencies created to support the aspirations identified can then be used to fufill all such considerations in mind. Companies organize annual employee meetings to review annual performance and address specific issues that they are facing in a bid to fulfill their aspirations and motivate them towards better performance. Another way to identify leadership traits is to reflect on past experiences, review all best practices adapted during such initiatives and use the lessons derived to implement in the future. For instance, Apple inc., the popular competitor to the software giant Microsoft, was on the brink of extinction due to some of the improper management policies it followed during the 90s. However, the company was quick enough to realize that it was missing able leadership at the top in the form of Steve Jobs (Stephen Covey, 2008). In fact, Apple has experienced a never before seen revival upon reinstating him predominantly due to Job’s recognition of the company’s core expertise – innovation. Through innovation, Apple created path breaking products like the iPod, iPhone and the Mac, which have outpaced competitors many times over since their introduction. Business schools rely on the popular case study method of instruction, which allows them to discuss several scenarios including those on leadership by citing and discussing examples such as Apple to determine its important contribution towards organizational success (Robert Taylor, 2008). Irrespective of the choice preferred, a competency model should serve the primary purpose of motivating everyone within the organization to thing about leadership. Providing a common platform to employees to discuss their issues and aid in mutual personal development will enhance the quality of leadership to a large extent. Ideally speaking, a competency model influences the manner in which leaders are selected, playing a crucial role in their training, evaluation and playing a significant role in setting company-wide and industry-wide standards to popularize desired characteristics of leadership (James Kouzes, 2007). The leadership dilemma With the softening of the global markets, capital is scare to come by and companies have become increasingly selective. Big firms, especially those that experienced the financial turmoil like the American International Group and General Motors, have experienced the pressure to turn more predictable and the relevance of profitable enterprises has resurfaced yet again. The growing call for the back-to-basics style of management has garnered increasing public support and government approval (Robert Kaplan, 2001). The excesses of the past in the form of WorldCom, Enron and Imclone have made people question the notion of the ‘hero’ leader. The recurring debacles in the corporate world have led many to question whether current leadership has become out of vogue and whether there needs to be more management rather than leadership towards sustaining our reserves and resources for the future. The answer, although not simple, is that we as a society require leadership more than we ever did before. Although one cannot underestimate the role of good management, it remains confined to playing a supportive role to leadership (David Cottrell, 2004). The recent debacle in the United States that soon spread to the world was not resolved by the executives who caused it through their haphazard management. It was the collective leadership demonstrated by world leaders, who ensured that troubled organizations did not go bust and that they were supported along a framework that helped them stand on their needs and return the favor they had been extended (the loans through the various stimulus packages). Leadership versus management Although human nature tends to swing either way depending on the situation, our preference for a one-dimensional vision aspired for simple and clear solutions when attending to complex problems. This makes one wonder over the difference between management and leadership in assisting an organization along the path of growth (Stephen Pelosi, 1998). The simple answer to this question is that while leaders determine what needs to be done to achieve an objective, managers simple establish different ways and choose the best ones to achieve them after the leaders have identified the ultimate target. In simpler words, while leader ascertain what and why of a problem, managers help establish how and when to carry out with the related solution. Consider the case of the CEO. In a typical organization such as Berkshire Hathway, its CEO Rupert Murdoch, is responsible for determining the strategy for the firm. Mr. Murdoch’s primary responsibilities include identifying potential target firms for investment and determining whether such investments will be profitable in the future. While Mr. Murdoch helps steer Berkshire towards a broader portfolio and better investment prospects, the managers under his authority control the performance of all such interests on a constant basis. It is these managers who ensure that the funds invested in a company generate the required returns (Richard Hatala, 2003). In case of any issue, the managers are limited only to the point of identifying problems and resolving them. However, the reins of the company lie with Mr. Murdoch who holds the ultimate authority in determining whether to hold or release a company from the portfolio on the basis of performance and prospects. Any issues within the member firms are largely resolved through recommendations from the leader, who holds the power to transfer resources across various sections of the investment portfolio (John Miner, 2006). In many ways, Mr. Murdoch simply plays the role of mobilizing his managers to strive for common aspirations. The managers are in turn concerned with maintaining order, controlling the resources and handling them. While a leader addresses the factors that drive organizations (based on visionary and emotional perspectives), managers cater to attributes that implements the processes that help the organization operate and conduct smooth business (David Cottrell, 2004). Clearly, management and leadership are distinct disciplines. Although both are crucial for the prospects of the organization, they are intricately aligned with each other. It is therefore impossible to revert to any one of them in case the other fails to work. Analyzing the effectiveness of a firm needs to consider much more than that. Further, organizations are systems. Any company, be it Volkswagen or IBM, comprises several organizational components that are interlinked to each other and work in close coordination (Peter Northouse, 2009). A firm is therefore not a herd of sheep walking along a straight line, but a single entity that comprises a high degree of interoperability that facilitates its survival. Likewise, success of a company depends on the balancing act and the coordination amongst multiple roles to attend to numerous internal processes and interact with the external environment (James Kouzes, 2007). In this context, leadership plays a pivotal role together with the support of dedicated management. Organizational success One of the most prominent organizations where one gets to experience inspirational leaders is in the military. Alongside, a military environment allows a fair assessment of true leadership potential in every member of the force. This precedent is applicable even to the civilian world and stands firm ground even without the need to wear a uniform. Some companies definitely have a person who can truly inspire people around him and take it upon themselves to become a better individual. In such leadership positions, the success of an organization or a specific department depends on the leadership qualities that one developed by being a subordinate and undergoing qualitative mentorship. Being a junior is never a deficiency and is simply a process of moving up along the hierarchy of life (Noel Tichy, 2005). As popularly said, to be a good leader, one needs to be a good follower first. Any trace of unprofessionalism on the part of the leader will result in losses at the lower levels and there is absolutely no scope for waste and shame. Acting with an unprofessional attitude will result in wastage of the entire effort. Whether it is issuing an order or requesting a subordinate to scale up their contribution, the leader needs to maintain focus towards the ultimate deliverable. Without having the courage to stand up and face a situation and without having the professional caliber to provide positive directions, one should never progress towards becoming a leader. This transcends even into the modern world, where many instructions in a company get carried across emails. Even under such a situation, an email will not help deliver the message across if one is not confident at delivering them in person (Edgar Schein, 2004). What makes up the mental framework of a leader? Confidence! One needs to be confident to make decisions and stand behind all their words and promises, whether such related decisions are right or wrong. Further, a leader should be gracious enough to accept defeat for a mistake and help carry forward the momentum in a positive manner (Kim Cameron, 2005). This can be witnessed in the case of the Yahoo CEO, Mr. Jerry Wang, who recently owned up responsibility for the company’s reduction in market share, and eventually made an exit when none of his attempts to forge a merger with companies like Microsoft ever worked (Kevin Cashman, 2008). While the number of traits associated with quality leadership is not limited to a book, the most important determinant that enhances leadership is ‘respect’ (Clifford Lee, 1989). If one cannot respect their superior, what would guide such a person when treading a difficult path along a career? Whether it’s a boardroom or a simple project, what would one depend upon in a hostile environment? Apart from having respect for superiors, who can guide us through difficult times, modern work culture depends on developing respect for individuals who work with us. In broader terms, leadership is a universal theme. Great leadership, applied to any situation, will achieve more than one can possibly imagine. A few words of guidance from a great inspiring leader can achieve wonders for an organization (Kim Cameron, 2005). Non-western organizations The notion of leadership is viewed differently among companies across the world. Apart from differences in work culture, the variations in the economy, lifestyles, cultures and administration have a profound impact on the flavor of leadership that one gets to witness within organizations in different regions. Companies that are not based or headquartered in the Americas or Europe are termed as non-western organizations. Consider the case of the Japanese automaker giant, Toyota. The world’s largest car manufacturer is renowned not just for churning out efficienct and appealing models of vehicles or making deep inroads in improving efficiency in its mass production assembly lines, but also known for the emphasis on leadership within its organizational culture. As such, Toyota does not view production or sales as the only determinants of success. The company views the importance and contribution of culture as a major component required to nurture leadership within its ranks (Pete Bradshaw, 1998). The ‘Toyota Way’ as it is popularly known, refers to the culture of efficiency within the company, where managers strive constantly to improve their decision making capabilities. Toyota has always maintained that it develops leaders by enhancing their experience in problem solving through an internal encouragement of collaborative work. Unlike many non-western organizations, Toyota downplays the relevance of organizational hierarchy and works along a flat approach. Toyota’s top leaders themselves work on the production and assembly lines and learn each and every part of the manufacture and sale processes (Robert Cooper, 2001). This helps them understand the complexity of work involved at each stage of work and inculcates a notion of respect for every fellow worker. This helps them take conscious decisions that take into account the interests of all stakeholders (Thomas Bandy, 2008). As mentioned previously, Toyota also emphasized the importance of collaboration to achieve success in a complex field such as automobile assembly. Through modern techniques such as video conferencing, the company maintains synchronism on a global scale and innovates consistently through product design and enhancement in manufacturing standards. The Indian economy, which opened its doors to foreign investment in the early 90s, is the latest entrant into the vibrant global economy. Indian companies, though young on the international arena, have demonstrated a great potential in leadership by emerging among the best performed amidst the 2008 financial crisis. The Indian society emphasizes primarily on quality education, which begins at a family level. A growing economy that is experiencing rapid growth is also demanding better education, greater to more resources and developing skills in English (Andrzej Huczynski, 2007). Companies in India are amongst the biggest recruiters of fresh university graduates and provide in-house training to almost all employees, which improve their professional skills and develops a sense of commitment and faithfulness amongst them. The rising prominence of business education in India is being seen as a need for more leaders and managers who can contribute in a variety of responsibilities (Warran Blank, 2001). A high growth implies Indian companies constantly face the challenge of grooming competent leaders from the grassroots levels. However, recent estimates suggest that the concept of leadership is yet to pick speed and remains largely myopic. Leadership roles among companies are largely awarded to employees who rise along the company ranks and follow a clear and precise pattern of progression along the organizational chain. The influx of foreign companies has also meant that top positions that drive strategy are often handled by expatriates. However, none of these two approaches can yield long term growth. As a country that is extremely diverse, India is virtually a continent. A line manager promoted to a decision making role may be unable to cope with this new found power that the position provides him. This results in most turning away upon being unable to comprehend the importance of effective team work in building businesses. This clearly signifies that there are no shortcuts to developing leadership skills. Besides improving business, leaders need to understand the culture within the company and correlate them with their goals. In the case of India, this is the biggest challenge for corporate in the coming years. References 1. Emily Morrison (2001), Leadership skills: developing volunteers for organizational success. New York: Fisher. 2. Richard Hatala (2003), Integrative Leadership: Building A Foundation For Personal, Interpersonal & Organizational Success. London: Pearson Education. 3. David Cottrell (2004), Leadership courage: leadership strategies for individual and organizational success. Manchester: Walk the Talk. 4. James Kouzes (2007), The leadership challenge. Cambridge: John Wiley. 5. Kevin Cashman (2008), Leadership from the Inside Out: Becoming a Leader for Life. London: Berrett-Koehler. 6. Robert Taylor (2008), Military Leadership: In Pursuit of Excellence. New York: Westview. 7. Edgar Schein (2004), Organizational culture and leadership. New York: John Wiley. 8. Stephen Covey (2008), The Speed of Trust: The One Thing That Changes Everything. New York: Simon & Schuster. 9. Bernard Bass (1998), Transformational leadership: industrial, military, and educational impact. London: Routledge. 10. Robert Kaplan (2001), The strategy-focused organization: how balanced scorecard companies thrive in the new business environment. Harvard Business Press. 11. Stephen Pelosi (1998), Leadership, communication & teamwork: management of human resources for organization success. University of Southern Australia. 12. John Miner (2006), Organizational behavior: Essential theories of process and structure. London: M. E. Sharpe. 13. Peter Northouse (2009), Leadership: Theory and Practice. London: SAGE. 14. Noel Tichy (2005), The Leadership Engine: How Winning Companies Build Leaders at Every Level. Cambridge: HarperBusiness. 15. Kim Cameron (2005), Diagnosing and changing organizational culture: based on the competing values framework. New York: John Wiley. 16. Clifford Lee (1989), The relationship between coaches leadership style, strategy and organizational culture on success. University of Arkansas. 17. Pete Bradshaw (1998), 4x4 leadership and the purpose of the firm. London: Routledge. 18. Robert Cooper (2001), Winning at new products: accelerating the process from idea to launch. Sydney: Perseus. 19. Thomas Bandy (2008), Spirited Leadership: Empowering People to Do What Matters. New York: Chalice Press. 20. Andrzej Huczynski (2007), Organizational behaviour: an introductory text. New York: Pearson Education. 21. Warran Blank (2001), The 108 skills of natural born leaders. AMACOM. Read More