Leadership in Industrial-Organizational Psychology - Essay Example

Title: Leadership in Industrial-Organizational Psychology Name: Course name: Course number: Instructor’s name: Date submitted: Industrial organizational psychology is a diagnostic and curative application of psychology in the corporate world. It is meant to cause an improvement in performance at work by addressing various topics that directly affect leaders and employees in the work place (Brain, 2002). Topics addressed in industrial organizational psychology include productive and counter productive behavior, leadership, group dynamics, remuneration, training, evaluation, occupational health, job analysis and organizational culture. The above mentioned topics are the most commonly tackled topics in industrial organizational psychology, but this is not to say that this area of psychology is limited to these topics only; it is a very wide subject (Anderson et al., 2002). This research paper seeks to tackle leadership under industrial organizational psychology and to answer the question: “what is expected of a leader and should leaders be seen as normal human beings who err?’ There still lies the difficulty in some individuals and organizations to differentiate between a leader and a manager in the context of an organization. A manager can be looked at as someone whose main focus is the assignment and overseeing of tasks to those under his command; a leader not only does that, but he makes the organization’s goal sink into the hearts of the employees and he goes ahead to lead them by example and to be a source of inspiration and motivation (Rogelberg, 2002). For one to be an effective leader there is need for him to be familiar with the psychology of his employees or “followers.” This causes him to have a greater understanding on them, thus enabling him to make the best out of them (Rogelberg, 2002). Research by industrial organizational psychologists indicate that the response (positive or negative) by the employees towards a person is basically influenced both by that person’s position in the organization and his or her natural personality and attitude towards them (Brain, 2002). Both a good leader and a bad leader will at first win the trust and loyalty of his followers, but the bad leader will lose the loyalty within no time. A good leader should be “someone who those he or she leads choose to naturally follow” (Rogelberg, 2002). At the workplace, a leader should be one who approaches any problem that arises from an analytical point of view, unlike those leaders who immediately start playing the blame game on their employees so that they will remain “clean” and “innocent.” Such a leader will always put the blame for any failure on his or her employees, but will relate all success achieved directly to himself. This is a bad way of leadership, because it means that such a leader sees his or her employees as mere tools through which he can make achievements (Aamodt, 2009). According to industrial organizational psychologists employees are more productive when they work with a leader who is open with them especially in matters concerning the demerits and risks involved in what they do and also the benefits and reward of what they do. In other words, employees are more at ease with their leaders when the question “what is in the undertaking for us?” is answered fully by their leader. Most bad leaders are known for lack of detail that will go a long way in helping the employee give the best in minimal time and energy, and they only believe in the employee getting to the desired end without bothering themselves with the means (Brain, 2002). Another discovery by the industrial organizational psychologists is that a leader who has lead certain ‘followers’ for long easily wins the trust and loyalty of the employees (Brain, 2002). Employees who have followed a certain leader for a decade will easily follow him or her without any form of resistance unlike how they will behave towards a new leader or the one who has lead them for two years or so. Therefore, if the leader of one decade brings up a new way of doing things in the firm, no matter how inconveniencing the new strategy is, the employees will almost automatically make themselves flexible and adaptive to the new strategy (Aamodt, 2009). A good leader has to have a very clear vision of where he is going and a clearly stated mission for doing what he does (Rogelberg, 2002). There are two important remarks made in the past that have been found to be very applicable in leadership in any organization. One of these remarks was made by Theodore Hesburgh who was the president of the University of Notre Dame. He stated that "The very essence of leadership is that you have to have a vision. It's got to be a vision you articulate clearly and forcefully on every occasion." Employees will rarely follow a leader who does not seem to have a clear vision and who shows no enthusiasm for it consistently (Rogelberg, 2002). James Kouzes and Barry Posner said, in relation to organizational leadership psychology, that "There's nothing more demoralizing than a leader who can't clearly articulate why we're doing what we're doing" (Rogelberg, 2002). This has been proved to be true in organizational leadership. I have seen employees boycott work and openly disrespect an operations manager, who was also the owner of the firm, because it was clear to those employees that this manager was totally confused and unsure of what his vision was and the reason why he ruthlessly commanded people to follow his orders. In the end, the firm was burnt down by the employees and has remained closed down to date. Unless a leader has a clear vision and is enthusiastic about the vision he or she carries, he or she will not be in a good position to inspire those under his or her leadership (Brain, 2002). Many may wonder why inspiration of employees is important yet they only look forward to getting their salary at the end of several work days or weeks. Imagine a scenario where a worker wakes up every morning to go to work as a routine, just because he or she was told that by the end of that day he or she should have called or emailed two hundred customers just to know their feed back on something. This employee can never for once try to fit in his or her employer’s shoes to know why two hundred customers should be contacted. But an inspiring leader will go an extra step and make his employee to know why two hundred and not one hundred and eighty customers should be contacted daily. This can be done by letting her in on the short and long term vision of the leader about the market share he wants to have attained (Anderson et al., 2002). Inspiration can be done in an indirect way, which is by recognizing the employees’ efforts and rewarding them accordingly. Most leaders in organizations have had the assumption that the only way or the best way of rewarding an employee is by giving them money, but nothing has ever been far from the truth (Rogelberg, 2002). Employees are human beings, and are therefore naturally relational and social. Research by some psychologists show that the best way to reward an employee for any of his or her efforts is by being friendly and relational towards them. In other words, human beings are more inclined to value intangible gifts than tangible ones (Brain, 2002). Intangible gifts that an employer or leader in an organization can give to his employees or followers is by listening to them, being respectful and courteous towards them, being honest and keeping his word, speaking optimistically towards them and portraying humility (Anderson et al., 2002). According to psychologists, it is natural for any human being put in a position where he or she is accountable to a person to look up to that person for example and mentorship. The same case applies to employees in any organization. It is natural for them to look up to their leader or employer for example and mentorship (Rogelberg, 2002). The virtues and vices a leader portrays determine how much the employees trust and respect him. A leader who preaches water but stuffs himself up with god wine will not be taken seriously by those under his leadership; in fact, his followers find him disgusting and they abhor even his mere presence, leave alone his leadership and authority. It becomes extremely hard for the leadership of such a leader towards his or her followers to bear fruit (Brain, 2002). A good leader should go ahead and even make known to his employees of followers his values in life. He or she should then live as per the demands of those values both in public and in private (Brain, 2002). The values he shares can either be directly related to the job done in the firm he leads or not. For example, a leader can share with his employees that he does not practice corruption by any means. If such a leader then fails to have proper documentation and government compliance for his business then his employees lose trust in him and respect for him (Anderson et al., 2002). On a different note, a leader can share with his employees that he values family and marriage. If such a leader is found to have infidelity or if such a leader’s marriage is known to be shaky and sour, then employees stop taking him seriously. Statistics show that forty seven percent of companies that close down do so after a divorce or separation of the proprietor (Brain, 2002). A good leader should not only share his or her values with his or her employees, but he should be keen to observe or find out about the values in the workplace among his employees and each of their personal values too. Personal values may mainly be based on religion, culture and background (Brain, 2002). A good leader should then let the employees know about the values set for the organization, and they should be observed together with personal values. The leader should be careful, though, when integrating personal values and the organization’s values because the former may not necessarily be right for the organization. However, a leader should always remember that no matter how many written values govern the organization, the values portrayed in action by him and the employees is what matters at the end of the day. Good leadership also goes hand in hand with proper time management (Anderson et al., 2002). Some industrial organizational psychologists have shifted their area of focus from what a good leader in an organization should be to what can be done to empower or develop good leaders. These breed of industrial organizational psychologists claim that leaders in organizations or institutions are no longer seen as human beings who have emotions and who can err like any other person (Rogelberg, 2002). There has been too much pressure and extremely high expectations on the leaders, and the pressure on them from all sides causes them to underperform, causing the society to put more pressure on them (Aamodt, 2009). The overall managing director of a company where I once worked as an intern for six months started attending a one week seminar for development of leaders once every month. The change he underwent was unbelievable. Before attending the seminars the company was at the verge of closing down. Workers had started boycotting work and customers had started shifting to other similar companies for better services. Some of the people in the management team had turned their backs on the managing director and had termed him as a failure and as one who does not deserve to be a leader. Almost two thirds of the management team resigned from work; the overall managing director was left all by himself. This downfall of his company affected his marriage and his family in general as well. It was in that season that his wife asked for a one year separation and she took the children with her. For we who were still working in this company, all that was left of our once tall and confident managing director was a rumpled, frustrated and ashamed man whose shoulders and back was bent in shame. One plus that this leader had was that he had good relational skills, and he related to his employees perfectly well, and even referred to those of us who were young as his ‘sons and daughters.’ Another strength he had was that he was very clear on the vision he had for the company both in short term and long term. The only weakness I would say he had was that he was not very good in recognizing efforts and achievements that were outstanding and then rewarding the employees responsible. The system and order of management and ranks of accountability in the firm were also areas that needed a lot of improvement. In this seminar, every area of leadership was tackled, ranging from industrial organizational leadership to leadership at home as a spouse or as a parent. Within three months of attending this seminar, a very big change was noted. His leadership skills were sharpened and his relational skills became even better. He was able to define his mission and vision in a clearer way than he had before and he even made known to us his values. The values of the company were also clearly stated, and our personal values were also given out. New strategies were put in place from then on. For example, it became compulsory for all employees to meet him once every week to give their suggestions, comments, complements and complaints. This brought about more transparency between us and the management. A number of incentives were also put in place, and this caused more motivation on our part. Needless to say, the company regained its posture, not to mention that the managing director’s family was also reunited. Many may say that leaders should naturally be self-motivated and should automatically perform well without any external aid, but the above scenario is a good indicator that leaders need help as well. They should be seen as normal human beings who have extra responsibilities above what any other ordinary person has. Undue pressure and unrealistic expectations should therefore not be heard of. Leadership in industries and organizations is a topic that has been researched immensely on by psychologists, who believe that good knowledge of the human psychology goes a long way in helping leaders to be effective in their work (Anderson et al., 2002). References: Aamodt, M. G. (2009). Industrial/Organizational Psychology (6th Ed.). Belmont: Cengage Learning. Anderson, N. et al. (2002). Handbook of industrial, work & organizational psychology: Organizational psychology, Volume 2. London: SAGE Publications. Brain, C. (2002). Advanced psychology: applications, issues and perspectives. Cheltenham: Nelson Thornes. Rogelberg, S. G. (2002). Handbook of research methods in industrial and organizational psychology. Massachusetts: Wiley-Blackwell. Read More