It is a common belief that leadership is important for organizations and societies to function. Leadership is an overall activity that is visible in people and even animals. Whereas it is easy to identify leadership in a situation, it is difficult to define it precisely (Avery, p.4). There is no specific and widely acceptable definition of leadership that exists and might never be found due to the complex nature of leadership. According to Fiedler (1971) he noted that: “There are almost as many definitions of leadership as there are leadership theories and there are many leadership theories as there psychologists working in the field (Adair, p.8). Most scholars agree in principle to define leadership as the nature of influencing the process and its resultant outcomes that occurs between a leader and followers and how this influencing process is explained by the leaders’ dispositional characteristics and behaviors, follows perceptions and attributions of the leader, and the context in which the influencing process occur. In this paper, I will discuss leadership theories reflecting on my personal experience of leaders and leadership; I will further develop a roadmap based on my belief on effective leadership.
I work in an organization that lies under the service industry, specifically, the hotel industry, it is a private entity that is family owned. Almost all leaders from the managing director to departmental heads are family; therefore, I am only but a follower. Furthermore, nearly all leaders in this organization acquired only the basic education; none possesses the college training mandatory to effectively carry out their leadership roles. In my organization there is a strong belief that leaders are born hence the reluctance in training. Decision making is a sole responsibility of the leaders and the people who are to carry out the implementation of these goals are not involved whatsoever. The employees here show low morale at work and less initiative as they have to follow the rules they are bound by. When it comes to Women, none is given a leadership position. In essence, the typical leadership theory practiced in my organization is the Great man theory which is based on the assumption that a leader is born and not made. This theory also assumes that in times of need a great leader will arise. This early leadership theory concentrates on people who are already great leaders.
The leadership aspect in such organizations is challenging and complex in nature, here a leader has to focus his attention on both the people he works with, accomplishment of set goals alongside customer satisfaction. My personal understanding of leadership in my organization is first, since leadership positions are only reserved for family I will never have an opportunity to occupy one. Second, I feel unappreciated since my opinions are never solicited for incorporation in decision making despite the fact that I am among the workers responsible to execute tasks to accomplish the set objectives of the organization. Third, on talking to a few of my colleagues I found out that all of us had a low morale at work, due to the arrogance shown to us by our leaders. Moreover, we are not motivated at all. Fourth, I feel that leaders are not necessarily born but made. Through training some managerial principles can be acquired and can enhance ones leadership skills.
Leadership has since evolved from the Great man theory to transformational theories and great progress has been made on how the worker responsible for the achievement of the organizational goal is viewed. In The great man theory, leaders are assumed to be born and not made this assumption saw leaders as having something to do with breeding; it also assumed that great leaders would emerge during the time of need. The organization I work for applies this theory. I find it outdated and less initiative and less involving, it also does not recognize Women as leaders it therefore doesn’t fit in today’s changing world. Trait theories developed later focused mainly on the psychology of the day that is, people were said to have inherited some characteristics that put them best suited to become leaders. Among these traits are; ambitious, decisive, dependable, and many others. However, this theory does not hold enough water and will not assist my organization to improve its leadership perception since it puts emphasis on personal traits and disregards situational factors and learning.
The Great man theory and trait theories have been undertaken by events due to the rise of behavioral sciences (Antonakis p.4). These behavioral theories of leadership looked at leaders as being made rather than being born. This contrasts the leadership system that is apparent in my organization. Behavioral theorists advocate for critical analysis of what an individual could actually do. The theory puts more emphasis on the fact leadership can be learnt rather than inherited as exhibited in the great man theory and trait theory. In these behavioral theories, success was assessed together with the leader’s actions. The theories also make it possible for behaviors which contributed to failure to be ascertained. For instance, under behavioral theories; the role theory explicitly indicates the role of the leader in the organization, and the managerial grid which explains the importance of a leader both to the organization and the workers for work to be performed effectively. That is, according to behavioral theories decisions are made by leaders and imposed upon on the subjects.
The above described theories of leadership are still archaic to me though better than the one applied in my organization. My greatest desire is to see organizations adopt better leadership styles that are follower involving and motivating. I will look further into the later theories developed in the quest to have an effective leader.
Participative leadership, also commonly referred to as democratic leadership style, enables leaders involve all stakeholders in the decision making process. Situational theorists advocated that leaders select the course of action based upon situational variables. According to them, different styles of leadership may be appropriate on certain types of decision-making. Participative leadership was later developed to provide an improvement on behavioral theories as they were autocratic. According to this style of leadership, it focuses on ideal leadership which puts into account the input of others into consideration. They encourage involvement and contributions from group members and assist the group members feel appreciated and encouraged in the decision making process. However, the leader retains the authority to grant the input of others in the decision making process (Brockbank, p.63). Transactional theories dwelt mainly on the role of supervision, group performance, and organization. Leadership is based on reward and punishment systems. They are mainly applicable in business, that is, when employees perform well, they are rewarded, on the other hand when they fail, they are punished. Relational theorists view a leader as someone who has the ability who has the same determination and expectations for change as they do. According to this theory, not all leaders are famous. A leader is one who has leadership qualities that not all people have. However, this does not imply that they are born leaders. According to this theory, people build there leadership qualities through life experiences. A good leader is able to effectively influence subordinates. He influences subordinates by using his authority because he has reputation and rapport. A leader may also use expert power to influence his subjects, that is, if the subordinates believe that the manager has more knowledge or technical skills then they will accept the manager.
After having an in depth discussion about the various leadership styles, it is worth mentioning that, however good the leadership style, it is the leader applying it who determines its success or failure. Effective leadership can therefore be defined as when the leader is best. I believe that the leader is best when his work is satisfactorily accomplished, he accomplishes the goals he has set and above all, the people feel that they are a part of process of goal attainment. Effective leadership essentially involves working from an in front that is; the leader only asks people to do what he himself if challenged would be willing to do.
For one to be an effective leader, he should admit that they know little compared to what they need to learn, this therefore calls for sustained learning through constant dialogue with the peers, advisors, consultants, team members, suppliers, customers and even competitors. To achieve this, a leader needs to be open to new ideas and advancement relevant to goal achievement. Effective leadership is basically about creating conditions necessary for all followers to perform their duties independently and effectively towards the achievement of the overall goal. I t is worth noting that people don’t just follow others for the sake of it but because they believe that leaders will help them achieve a better life, that they have a vision and therefore set goals for them and give them directions, people also tend to follow those who know what they are doing. In a nut shell effective leadership is about vision, energizing people, communication, charisma, and competence (Bryman, p.6).
In my opinion, a necessary element for effective and correct leadership is the formation of strengthened followers in pursuit of moral aims, leading to moral results that are shepherded by moral ways. My leadership definition obligates me to differentiate it conceptually from power and management. Power and management are concepts that are usually confused with leadership. The means by which a leader has to potentially influence others is referred to as power. For instance, referent power, reward power, and expert power enables a leader to have the ability to influence others. According to transformational and charismatic theorists, leadership is purpose driven resulting in change based on ideals, values, emotional exchanges, and symbols (Storey, p.11). Management on the other hand, is objective driven resulting in stability based on rationality, bureaucracy, and the achievement of contractual goals. However, in an organization, successful leadership needs successful management. These two concepts are complementary. In many cases, leadership goes beyond management since it is necessary for outcomes to go beyond expectations
Similarly, the evolution of leadership theories has consequently led to the evolution of supervisory roles in organizations towards empowered work groups’ away form hierarchical and bureaucratic past (Kimball, p.40). These transformations have greatly diminished the need for traditional supervisory responsibilities. Peter Drucker, a management consultant anticipated future management trends and predicted the end of a traditional supervisor (Kimball, p. 40). Edwards Demming, the father of quality movement just like Drucker suggested that traditional leadership practices are not only outdated but actually harmful to the contemporary workforce. Demming is renowned for his ability to think clearly, said “our prevailing system of management has destroyed our people”. The role of a supervisor within an organization is essential. This role must evolve into something else otherwise if it remains static in the changing work environment, it will cease to add any meaningful value to the organization. This is correct for all levels of traditional supervision in the organizations attempting to self-directed work.
Leadership is necessary in organizations for a variety of reasons. It is needed at the supervisory level to complement organizational systems and to improve subordinates effectiveness, motivation, and satisfaction. Leadership is needed at the strategic level to ensure the coordinated functioning of the organization as it interacts with the changing external environment. In essence, leadership is required to direct and guide organizational and human capital towards the strategic objectives of the company and ensure that organizational functions are aligned with the external environment.
The appropriate manner to assess leadership is in terms of how effective organizational teams and groups are in the organization. When evaluating the personal ability of an individual within the organization, team performance must always be put into consideration. For a leader to be effective, he has to posses the ability to build a team. Hallarn (1992) pinpoints eight problems of leadership that can affect team performance. Six of these problems are task oriented while the remaining two are team maintenance related. On task orientation, a successful leader communicates clearly his mission, identifies resources and talents that are available, plans and organizes, and coordinates activities. Leaders leaning on maintenance orientation minimize and resolve disputes among group members and ensure that the team members understand their goals, limits, available resources and problems. Yukl et al., (1990) notes team building tasks overlap with the taxonomy of leader behavior. I believe that the personality of a leader has predictable effects on group performance within an organization. For instance, leaders with more assurgency scores communicate more with their teams which enhances their capacity to understand the goals and the performance standards expected of them to attain. Moreover, these leaders are also gifted in making building alliances with people outside of the team. This enables them to solicit for resources to secure necessary equipment and resources (Yukl et al., 1990). A leader can also be evaluated in terms of his conscientiousness, that is, in relation to him being perceived as trustworthy, planning ability, and organized. Emotional stability of a leader is associated with him or her being stable under pressure, his or her ability to resolve disputes, and to handle feedbacks. All this promotes team effectiveness (Yukl et al., 1990).
My discussion so far concerns the interrelationship that exists between personality and leadership in general. Leadership proponents understand that leadership is relative to the teams they are in control of. A leaders main concern should be the teams development history and the major obligations performed by the group. Individuals heading the organization when it opens up shop may be more effective if they have a credible and strategic foresight of what the team can perform. Such leaders will also be required to contend with the discouragement associated with the unavoidable failures in the start up phase. On the other hand, accomplished leaders in established organizations require being more orderly, ceremonial, concerned about detail, and less visionary. In view of this, leaders who are emotionally stable, and with more intellect may be more successful in developing new products or services, whereas leaders with more conscientiousness scores may be more effective in concerns with having established products, procedures and services.
In an organizations setting, leadership is the ability to influence followers to accept the vision of the leader. The followers are motivated, involved in the decision making process and given the necessary resources needed to accomplish the goals set by the leader (Harvard Business School, p.16). By virtue of the leader setting the goals he is the one giving the organization the intended direction. Since leaders cannot execute all duties geared towards achieving his goals, he needs people to enable him achieve them. Effective leadership is therefore called for. Leaders need to be equipped with managerial principles to influence people to accept his ideas as though they were theirs. I t is therefore obvious that not all leaders succeed since not all in the leadership positions are effective leaders possessing the vital leadership qualities necessary to achieve goals. However exposure to the right training programs can propel such leaders to greater heights (Adair, p.33).
References
Adair, J. (2003) The inspirational leader: how to motivate, encourage and achieve success. London: Kogan Page.
Adair, J. (2007) Develop your leadership skills. London: Kogan Page.
Antonakis, J., Cianciolo, A.T. & Sternberg, R.J. (2004). The Nature of Leadership. Thousand oaks, Ca: Sage Publications.
Avery, G.C. (2005) Understanding Leadership: Paradigms & Cases. London Sage Publications.
Brockbank, & McGill, I. 2006, Facilitating reflective learning through mentoring and coaching, Kogan Page, London.
Bryman, A, 1992, Charisma and leadership of organizations, Sage, London.
Hallarn, G., & Campbel, 1992, Selecting Team Members, Start with a Theory of Team Effectiveness. Paper Presented at the Seventh Meeting of the 7th Annual Meeting of the Society of Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Montreal, Canada.
Harvard Business School, 1998, Harvard Business Essentials, HBS Press, Massachusetts.
Kimbal, F, 1999, Leading Self Directed Work Teams, McGraw-Hill,New York.
Northouse, P, 2007, Leadership, Theory & Practice (4th ed), Sage Publications, Thousand oaks, Ca.
Rickards, T, & Clark, M, 2006, Dilemmas of Leadership, Routledge, London.
Storey, J, 2004, Leadership in Organizations, Current Issues and Key Trends. Routledge, London.
Yukl, G, A, 2006, Leadership in organizations, (6th ed), Prentice Hall, Upper saddle River, NJ.