Organisational and personal leadership mindsets are significant pillars for determining the level of effectiveness in decision-making. The Hoffmann-La Roche is a subsidiary of the Swizz-based Roche Holding AG and operates under the agency of National Pharmacy L.L.C. As a successful healthcare-based company, the subsidiary in Oman has employees who are multinational, multi-gendered, and multi-religious. This means that the Hoffmann-La Roche’s work environment is highly stratified and multifaceted to accommodate diverse employee characteristics through an all inclusive organisational culture. This paper examines the leadership mindsets, traits at the Hoffmann-La Roche through the eye of the seven mindset theory. Moreover, the essay reviews personal leadership growth, strengths, and improvements in order to proactively plan for future role taking. In addition, the treatise discusses how my personal understanding of leadership and present recommendations for improvements.
specifically for you
for only $16.05 $11/page
Hoffmann-La Roche’s Work Environment Leadership Assessment
Range of leadership Mindsets
Established in the Middle East in 1997, the Roche Diagnostics in Oman has expanded into a successful company with nine employees under a country manager who reports directly to the Roche Diagnostics Middle East in Dubai. Since the original business has been in existence for more than a hundred years, the main leadership mindsets being practiced are functional, sustainable, professional, and big boss philosophies. Specifically, the big boss mindset is applied in the leadership reporting channel with the regional director at its apex (Cowan & Beck 2005). This regional director makes the major decisions on behalf of the company within the Middle East.
The same trend cascades down the management rank up to the ordinary employees. The management rank is instituted in a way that power and dominance emanate from the top leadership (Baxter 2015). Since the mother company is in Europe, the sustainable philosophy mindset is practised at the departmental level and characterised by a proactive decision-making based on the experiences of the individual employees, but within specific expectations. Through this strategy, the organisation has a strong socio-cultural adaptation characterised by an active intelligence development and communal approach to solving different inter- and intradepartmental challenges (Dawlabani 2013). For instance, each department is expected to make decisions that are angled on the monthly business objectives.
The functional mindset is also dominant within the organisation and controlled by a specific value system that is angled on quality and efficiency. There are systems in place to control individual and group decision-making processes (Harrison 2017). For instance, a department decision procedure is characterised by a preset value manual outlining expectations against best practices (Baxter 2015). This means that the problem-solving environment is individualised and attached to certain minimum expectation levels. Due to the complexity of the medical diagnostics business environment, the company has envisioned a unique value system to manage the decision-making environment (Cowan & Beck 2005). Lastly, the organisation also practices the professional leadership mindset that is characterised by engaging real data in making decisions. The management structure is linear and dynamic enough to integrate the general objectives into a master plan in decision-making (Dawlabani 2013). This means that most critical decisions are made by the book. There are rules and regulations governing the decision-making process (Harrison & Wicks 2013). Therefore, each action has to be tested against a statistical measurement to ensure that there is stability in performance and order.
Examples of the Leadership Traits
Since the predominant mindsets are functional, sustainable, professional, and big boss logics, examples of leadership traits include excessive concentration on functionality of the systems, traditional avenues for interactions, flexibility in decision-making, and focused organisational competences in task execution and filing reports (Baxter 2015). Moreover, there are deep human bonds among the employees who are encouraged to proactively participate in the organised activities through various social and professional networks (Harrison 2017). The organisation has a strategic tool for encouraging self-development and promotion of community feeling for sustainable unity (Dawlabani 2013). For instance, the decision-making process involves open discussions in a harmonious environment through shared responsibility (Cowan & Beck 2005). The organisational culture of the company is framed in a way that it promotes a strong sense of purpose among the employees to feign a group-thinking phenomenon. For instance, the human resource department is structured around holistic motivational principles to guide group discipline and control divergent behaviours. As a result, the company was voted among the best employers in the Middle Eastern region. However, the leadership hierarchical order is still used to express power and dominance on the lower ranking employees (Dawlabani 2013).
The Seven Mindsets Theory Application
Table 1. Team members’ evaluation on the basis of the seven leadership mindsets.
|Seven Mindset Theory||Key Member(s) of the Team||Description and Traits|
|Tradition||POC Regional Product Specialist||He is more than 50 years old, has worked for 30 years at the company, and was a former country manager. This employee is an ardent believer of hierarchy and has internalised the customers and norms of the organisation. He respects the seniors and prefers harmony.|
|Big Boss||Oman’s Country Manager||The country manager is 35 years old and holds an MBA. He was the sales manager in Jordan. This team member has a superior personality and very composed in self-expression. The team member is always a fighter and prefers dominance in any situation. However, he has an inflated ego.|
|Professional||Application Specialist||The application specialist is very responsible, obedient, loyal, and keen on the moral sense. He is dutiful and currently the chairman of the CSR Committee. However, this team member is often intolerant, punitive, and judgmental.|
|Success||Field Service Engineer||She is 32 years old. This team member is the most productive person in the company. She is goal oriented and driven by results. However, she is too dominating besides being self-absorbed.|
|Sustainable||Field Service Engineer||He is 25 years old. This employee is sensitive to the needs of others, consensual, and proactive in addressing social concerns. However, the excessive jovialness has imposed a blind group-thinking among his junior employees.|
|Functional||Sales Specialist||She is 30 years old. This team member is very simple and social to all employees. She is always the source of positive energy in the company. However, this employee sometimes appears as being too demanding and unfeeling.|
Oman Leadership Capabilities and a Plan for CPD Development
Personal Leadership Capabilities
Based on personality assessment, my highest score was in leadership mindset 5 (success) (see table 2). This means that I excelled in the ability to be productive. Moreover, I am goal oriented and energised in executing duties. I focused on realising outcomes from a set target. Specifically, my scores on the elements of attraction, strength, and relevance are 9, 8, and 9, respectively. This means that I do not need to make any adjustments within this mindset since my score is almost excellent. I am a functional and practical person as confirmed by a higher score on the 7th leadership mindset. This means that I have internalised the traits of living the richness of life, constantly impacting on quality, and proactively thinking outside the box (Harrison & Wicks 2013). I am also able to comfortably live without influence from social needs. However, I am sometimes intolerant and impatient with incompetent people. My change meter score was highest in the seventh leadership mindset, which means that I excel as a practical and functional person (Cowan & Beck 2005). Therefore, there is no need to make adjustments since my score suggests that I have internalised these leadership traits.
100% original paper
on any topic
done in as little as
My score for sustainable leadership mindset was equally high at 22 points. Specifically, I scored above average on the aspects of attraction, strength, and relevance at 7, 7, and 8 points, respectively. This means that I am a relatively consensual and inclusive person when dealing with others (Harrison & Wicks 2013). Moreover, the high score suggests that I am an empathetic and sensitive person who is overly concerned with the welfare of others in the place of work. However, because of the ‘over-concern’ attitude, I might impose a group-thinking tendencies, which is naïve and unrealistic in the modern organisational environment (Baxter 2015). The double positive score on the change meter suggests that I need to make slight adjustments in the attraction elements to avoid unnecessary group-thinking attitude out concern for others.
From the personal assessment, my score on the fourth leadership mindset (professional) was relatively high at 18 points. However, my score on strength was only 5 points, which is on the average mark. This means that as much as I am a responsible, dutiful, loyal, and obedient person, these traits have not been internalised as part of my leadership traits (Harrison & Wicks 2013). For instance, I might need supervision to excel in these traits, although they are part of my inner being. However, I am equally judgmental, fanatical, and punitive in interacting with others (Dawlabani 2013). Although the score is a single positive value in the change meter, there is a need to make adjustments to improve on the ability to proactively exercise these traits by balancing the healthy and unhealthy habits. I also scored high on the leadership mindset 3 (big boss) at 17 points. However, my scores on the aspects of strength and relevance were average. This means that my leadership traits such as being action-oriented, energetic, and creative are negated by an inflated ego and unrealistic self-image (Baxter 2015). I need to trim down on the unhealthy sides such as exploiting guiltlessly to fulfil self desires at the expense of others.
Lastly, my score on leadership mindset 2 (traditional) was at 11 points. This suggests that I am still attuned to mystical forces and a believer in family bonds when interacting with others (Harrison 2017). The close bond makes me a captive of group-thinking and venerable to pathologies and desires of others. The score of 2 for relevance and strength aspects results in a ‘much less’ reading on the change meter (Cowan & Beck 2005). This means that I should minimise the unhealthy traits to boost the score. Fortunately, I do not possess the life support leadership mindset, which is a primitive leadership trait (Dawlabani 2013).
Table 2. My personal vmeme ranking.
|Vmeme||Score||Rating on Change Meter|
Plan for CDP Development
From the personal assessment, I should improve on the traditional, big boss, and professional leadership mindsets. The following plan was created to implement the proposed adjustments (see table 3).
Table 3. Plan for CDP development.
|Leadership Mindset||Current Weaknesses||Goals||Resources||Strategies|
|Traditional||I am a captive to the thoughts of others and can easily be manipulated by the desires of others||Improved self -esteem||Motivational videos and books||Tune an internal mechanism for setting limits and respecting them when alone and during group interactions.|
|Big Boss||I have an inflated ego and sometimes set unrealistic image||Reduced feeling of self-importance||Enrolling in ego management classes||I should be more accommodating and proactive in balancing the desires for a perfect self-image and organisational culture|
|Professional||I am rigid, judgmental, intolerant, and fanatical.||To be flexible and tolerant||Team building training and motivational books||Be more flexible and accommodating to fit in the organisational setting during inter- and intrapersonal interaction with others.|
My leadership style is positively aligned to the Hoffmann-La Roche’s functional, sustainable, professional, and big boss leadership mindsets. My own scores on these mindsets are above average. This means that my personal leadership traits fit within the organisational culture (Baxter 2015). My high score in success, which is currently lacking in the organisation, suggests that I am in a position to improve on Hoffmann-La Roche’s goal orientation, productivity, and focused performance based on set goals for effective outcomes.
Leadership has evolved over the years from a linear to a more dynamic and multifaceted approach. The evolution commenced with a survival approach to leadership into a more flexible, functional, and practical logic in line with the dynamics of the society. For instance, during the basic existence era, the only motivating factor for leadership was the need to survive and thrive in the primitive world (Cowan & Beck 2005). As a result, the early man opted for life support leadership mindset to survive the simple challenges of that time such as hunting and self-protection from wild animals. As civilisation replaced primitive existence, the pre-industrial era mankind transitioned to the traditional leadership model characterised by simple group thinking approach that is driven by shared tribal bonds such as family relations (Dawlabani 2013). The big boss mindset followed following the complex challenges that were associated with the industrial era. The demand and supply for different needs of the society were high and there was a need for a systematic, effective, and efficient production system (Baxter 2015). As a result, the organisation of factors of production created the need for a manager in a high rank to manage workers in the lower ranks (Harrison & Wicks 2013).
As systems became self-sustaining, the big boss-small boss mentality was slowly replaced by a more dynamic and data driven leadership approach called the professional management. This mindset is characterised by leadership based on experience and quantifiable knowledge based on the market needs and dynamics. In the 1960s through to the early 1990s, there was a paradigm shift to a tech and finance era that inspired leadership motivated by innovation. This era created the success leadership mindset that transformed into a sustainable approach as social and digital era took over (Dawlabani 2013). The sustainable trait was driven by focused market needs to satisfy specific demands from an informed population. At present, the functional and practical leadership mindset is the most common approach across the globe. This mindset conforms to the analytics and rationality-based management aimed at balancing a set of input bundles for optimal output, with specific metrics for tracking progress (Harrison & Wicks 2013). From this analysis, it is apparent that leadership mindset has experienced a structural paradigm shift across the seven eras.
Definition of an Effective Leader
An effective leader should be dynamic and focused on meeting the unique needs of each era through proactive engagement of resources and subordinates for optimal outcome. Moreover, an ideal leader should be flexible, performance-oriented, and inspired by the need to catalyse positive change (Baxter 2015). In addition, an effective leader is a role model figure who can inspire confidence in a team through an evidence-base decision-making process governed by market analytics and not personal prejudices (Sostrin 2013).
My own leadership mindset development has been effective and practical enough to address the current challenges in the business environment. For instance, I am a focused, performance-oriented, dutiful, and disciplined leader. Moreover, I can effectively work under pressure and value the input of others in decision-making. Fortunately, the Hoffmann-La Roche organisation has internalised different effective leadership mindsets that promote a sustainable and holistic work environment for the employees (Baxter 2015). However, there is a need to improve on the company’s approach towards goal orientation, productivity, and focused performance since its current score on the success mindset is below average. On a personal level, I should improve my scores for traditional, big boss, and professional leadership mindsets to be an effective and an all-round employee (Cowan & Beck 2005). Specifically, I should be more flexible, patient, and accommodating to other members of the organisation to foster a healthy and holistic working environment.
Baxter, J 2015, ‘Who wants to be the leader? The linguistic construction of emerging leadership in differently gendered teams’, International Journal of Business Communication, vol. 52, no. 4, pp. 427-451.
Cowan, C & Beck, D 2005, Spiral dynamics: mastering values, leadership and change, Wiley-Blackwell, New York, NY.
Dawlabani, S 2013, Memenomics: the next generation economic system, BookBaby, Pennsauken, New Jersey, NJ.
Harrison, C 2017, Leadership theory and research: a critical approach to new and existing paradigms, Springer, New York, NY.
100% original paper
written from scratch
specifically for you?
Harrison, J & Wicks, A 2013, ‘Stakeholder theory, value, and firm performance’, Business Ethics Quarterly, vol. 23, no. 1, pp. 97-124.
Sostrin, J 2013, Beyond the job description: how managers and employees can navigate the true demands of the job, Palgrave Macmillan, New York, NY.