Introduction
In the process of rolling out a product or service, the likelihood of dealing with a wide array of leadership styles increases significantly. Therefore, it is necessary to acknowledge this possibility, estimate the most probable outcomes, and outline feasible prevention and mitigation measures. The following paper describes the interactions of different leadership styles and addresses the possible opportunities and challenges associated with the encounter.
Main body
First, it should be mentioned that the majority of leadership styles create a mutually supportive effect when utilized appropriately. For instance, transformational leadership, which relies on high transparency and openness in achieving the desired level of efficiency and engagement, extensively utilizes communication with team members (Top, Akdere, & Tarcan, 2015). From this standpoint, it is possible to expect that the involvement of an individual with a transactional style, which also prioritizes communication in the employee engagement process, will complement, and possibly enhance, the effects of transformational leadership on the organization. The same can be expected from the technique of leading by example, typical for both transformational and participative leadership styles, and associated with an overall supportive effect (Simons & Leroy, 2014).
On the other hand, both the Laissez-Faire and autocratic styles will likely contrast my approach to leadership since both rely on principles that are rarely used by transformational leaders. Specifically, Laissez-Faire leadership, oriented primarily on highly trained employees, is not applicable to organizations with a diversified workforce due to the lack of control and supervision necessary for less experienced workers. The autocratic style, on the other hand, can address the identified employee segment but would feel unnecessarily restrictive for workers with highly individualized approaches and those in need of greater autonomy.
It is also important to recognize the potential challenges associated with potential conflicts between leadership styles. The easiest example is a scenario where a person receives approval of an idea from a Laissez-Faire leader but encounters resistance in the course of its implementation from someone who favors greater control (e.g., an autocratic leader). Such a situation will contribute to confusion within the team and discourage the employees from active participation. Another possibility is the conflicting perceiver effects among different individuals with leadership responsibilities, and, as a result, disrupt the coordination of human resources (van der Kam, van der Vegt, Janssen, & Stoker, 2015).
However, it is also possible to expect the emergence of several opportunities beneficial for the project. For instance, the involvement of a transactional leader may improve consistency in terms of short-term organizational performance by focusing on specific goals and objectives (Marquis & Huston, 2015). Transformational leadership skills, on the other hand, may promote creativity at innovation, which may be particularly necessary for rolling out an unfamiliar product or service.
Emotional Intelligence
Emotional intelligence is an important component of efficient team management (Trivellas, Gerogiannis, & Svarna, 2013). The ability to correctly identify emotions improves communication and contributes to trust between the leader and its team (Van der Linden, Tsaousis, & Petrides, 2012). The following paper describes a case of inappropriate emotional intelligence utilization and argues in favor of an alternative scenario that would lead to improved outcomes.
The case in question was observed in a workplace setting and developed gradually over several encounters. The nursing administrator was concerned with the performance of a nurse who had recently joined the facility staff. The nurse in question often exhibited signs of distraction and, according to the reports of his co-workers, violated routine safety measures twice over the last months (with no negative consequences). Due to the high workload in the facility at the time, the issue was ascribed to workplace stress and the lack of experience. Instead of considering a personal solution, the nursing administrator decided to bring up the issue of inadequate workplace safety in one of the staff meetings.
At this point, it should be noted that aside from the mentioned incidents, no other violations were observed in the setting. A week later, the administrator was notified of the apparently troubling emotional state of one of the employees, at which point it became clear that the nurse in question was undergoing an emotionally challenging period in life, aggravated by a recent move of one of his relatives to another state. The issue was immediately addressed by contacting a nurse leader, who eventually managed to minimize the adverse emotional effects. However, it is apparent that the initial response from the nursing administrator was misguided by attributing the underperformance to stress and exhaustion rather than personal emotional reasons.
Conclusion
Considering my identified emotional intelligence strengths, I suggest the following alternative. Upon receiving the reports about a distracted employee who is also prone to safety violations, I would start by approaching an employee in a professional setting (without necessarily contacting him). Observing the behaviors and emotional indicators would provide the administrator with the necessary information about the emotional state of the nurse and point to the possibility of an unidentified issue. The next step would be to contact a nurse leader, discuss the issue, and decide on the most appropriate way of addressing it. While, admittedly, this eventually occurred in the scenario above, a timely intervention could eliminate the need for safety policy revision and, more importantly, prevent a potentially hazardous situation where emotional distress of an employee could lead to further disruption of workplace safety routines.
References
Trivellas, P., Gerogiannis, V., & Svarna, S. (2013). Exploring workplace implications of emotional intelligence (WLEIS) in hospitals: Job satisfaction and turnover intentions. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 73, 701-709.
Van der Linden, D., Tsaousis, I., & Petrides, K. V. (2012). Overlap between General Factors of Personality in the Big Five, Giant Three, and trait emotional intelligence. Personality and Individual Differences, 53(3), 175-179.
Marquis, B. L., & Huston, C. J. (2015). Leadership roles and management functions in nursing: Theory and application (8th ed.). Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott, Williams & Wilkins.
Simons, T., & Leroy, H. (2014). Issues in researching leadership in health care organizations. In T. Simons, H. Leroy, & T. Savage (Eds.), Leading in health care organizations: Improving safety, satisfaction and financial performance (pp. 221–234). Thousand Oaks, CA: Emerald Group Publishing.
Top, M., Akdere, M., & Tarcan, M. (2015). Examining transformational leadership, job satisfaction, organizational commitment and organizational trust in Turkish hospitals: Public servants versus private sector employees. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 26(9), 1259-1282.
van der Kam, N. A., van der Vegt, G. S., Janssen, O., & Stoker, J. I. (2015). Heroic or hubristic? A componential approach to the relationship between perceived transformational leadership and leader–member exchanges. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 24(4), 611-626.