TABLE OF CONTENTS
TOC \o "1-3" \h \z \u Task 1 Current theories and models of leadership and their applicability
Current Leadership Theories
Leadership Effectiveness
Task 2 Current and future requirements
Current Requirements of Leadership
Future Requirements of Leadership
Task 3 Proposals for the development of leadership
References
Task 1 Current theories and models of leadership and their applicability Current Leadership Theories
Leadership is one of the most pressing issues and one of the least understood concepts in the corporate world. The history of leadership encompasses through several paradigm shifts and voluminous body of knowledge. As a universal activity, leadership is fundamental for effective organizational and social functioning. The very nature of leadership is its influencing process and its resultant outcomes. Such process is determined by the leaders and followers characteristics, dispositions, behavior perceptions, attributions and the context wherein the process of influencing occurs. The moral purpose of leadership is to create an empowered follower that leads to moral outcomes that are achieved through moral means (Antonakis, et al, 2004, p. 5).
In defining leadership, we must take into consideration its distinctness from power and management. Power refers to the potential of any leader to influence others that include referent power, expertise, the ability to reward or punish and others. Management refers to objective-driven approaches in acquiring stability based on rationality, bureaucratic means and the fulfillment of contractual obligations. Whereas, leadership refers to purpose-driven that results in changes that are based on values, ideals, visions, symbols and emotional exchanges. Based on these definitions, we can say that leadership and management both requires power, however, management implicates the cognitive domain of employees compared to leadership that has direct effect on affective domain (Ibid).
Since leaderships rely upon providing directions that satisfies the motivational needs of others, there is a relationship between leadership and motivation. As an individual power, motivation can stand on its own. Leaders, on the other hand, act to provide satisfaction. To wit, successful leaders understand the needs of others and subsequently apply perception and influence to show others that the most satisfaction is achieved when following the leader’s view. Leadership cannot succeed without motivation (Bittel, 1992, p. 269).
According to Antonakis, et al, leadership is fundamental for effective organizational and social functioning. The very nature of leadership is its influencing process and its resultant outcomes. Such process is determined by the leaders and followers characteristics, dispositions, behavior perceptions, attributions and the context wherein the process of influencing occurs. The moral purpose of leadership is to create an empowered follower that leads to moral outcomes that are achieved through moral means (2004, p. 5). As a universal activity, leadership refers to purpose-driven that result in changes that are based on values, ideals, visions, symbols and emotional exchanges.
There are two theories on leadership that shape leadership aspect of most organizations of today as transactional and transformational theories. Transactional theory is also known as management theory. The transactional nature of leadership deals with the task-oriented leaders. They tend to focus on role of supervision, operations and group performance in achieving finite goals. A system of reward and punishment is the basis of this theory; hence, the relationship is very dependent. Many economists believed that the integration of transactional with the transformational leadership is more favorable instead of just substituting the former with the latter (Martin, 2006, p. 47).
Transformational leadership, also refer to as relationship theory, builds upon the connection between leaders and followers. Transformational leaders have a strong sense of mission and an ability to influence subordinates. They lead the group from “what is” to “what is describable” to “what ought to be”. The main functions of transformational leaders are idealized leadership, inspirational motivation, intellectual stimulation and individualized consideration (Martin, 2006).
Leadership can be distinguished as explicit and implicit and formal and informal. Explicit leadership is base on leader’s actual behavior (overt) that are measured and evaluated and implicit leadership theory is founded on conceptual structure, definition and expectation of the people on how a leader should behave (covert). Assessing the implicit leadership theory always incorporates explicit elements (Silverthrone, 2005, p. 68).
Leadership EffectivenessEffective leadership per se takes on influencing followership. Leadership organizations ensures that decision-making is placed at the proper level and purports that proper checking and balances are in place. The Board of Directors is responsible for conducting thorough review through solid and diverse experiences and credentials. The board also embodies the corporate governance guidelines, codes of business conduct and financial ethics. The corporate officers support the board and occupy the management role. The leadership’s role mainly focuses on driving growth and sustainability thus it requires a close contact with different committees and units.
First, there is a clear distinction on the roles played by the leaders and the employees; they know their stand. Second, leaders manifest faith towards the capability of the employees regardless of the gender. The workplace is not discriminating in any way. Third, individualized consideration and reasonable sanctions are other positive aspects of their leadership. Fourth, because of fear, poignantly, the workforce is more disciplined. Avoiding punishments also forces the employees to work productively. Fifth, the knowledge that ‘their hardwork will be recognized’ worked as implicit motivators. And finally, informations are disseminated faster and easier; thus, reciprocation is usual and acknowledged.
The leadership style itself must be improved. The organization must combine another leadership style which is transformational with transactional leadership (Goethals, et al, 2004, p. 697). Concerns with business operations and discipline within the workplace are evident. Though the people will be motivated more if the organization will provide for a ‘sense of purpose and ownership’ as a motivation. Influence over followers, task goals and organizational culture should be a priority for leaders. Interaction patterns must be likewise examined (Deresky, 2006, p. 423) and identify the possibility of face-to-face exchanges. In this way, the leaders can directly, beyond doubt identify the needs of their people.
In considering how the leaders influence the organizational culture, the structure of leadership must be also explored. Since there are many leadership styles that could be used then the manner of influencing the culture-building process conforms to many ways as well. For one, transactional leaders work within their organizational culture and transformational leaders change them. While also, leaders worked on transforming organizational visions into reality then the performance and productivity of the organization as a whole must be aligned around that vision. Culture-building, in lieu with this, necessitates a purpose-driven leadership. However, as Edgar Schein puts it, leaders are exposed to different orientations and role definitions and the impact of founders as leaders as well. Schein maintains a ‘culture embedding’ that claims that culture manages management more than management manages culture especially when organizations approach the organizational midlife.
Bass argued that leaders could function as founders of cultures, of counter cultures and even act as agents of change in dominant cultures. Antecedent leaderships are the main source of organization’s culture and it affects the subsequent leader-subordinate relationships in several ways (1990). The founding or organizational cultures relates to a preconceived ‘cultural paradigm’ that could either strengthen or damaged the entire organization. As culture-builders, leaders understand the power of culture, values and integrating them into the organization. The need for leaders to be cultural facilitators is manifested in the daily management structures and routines in order to achieve organizational purposes or end values.
Organizational evolution in midlife is apparent in the changing dynamics of culture and leadership. As groups mature they develop subgroups. The consideration of microcosm reflects a degree of relativity. The creation and management of subcultures are other tasks for leaders. However, there are major bases of differentiation as functional, geographical, differentiation (by product, market and technology and by hierarchical level), ‘divisionization’, mergers and acquisition, joint ventures and structural opposition groups. Occupational functions help organizations to be more articulated and, thus, shorten the communication gap. Since occupational functions are exercised at all levels of the organization, a diversified workforce based on functions will exist. Another thing is that the creation of subcultures conforms to several geographical units that logically alter the communication. The impact of strategic alliances and organizational members’ resistance, in addition, calls for an organizational change that may sacrifice the organizational culture.
The culture of an organization is intertwined with the philosophy, purposes, functions and structures and wherein organizational members develop mutually-accepted ideas and beliefs regarding what is real, what is important and how to respond. Further, the importance of leaders is viewed as main transmitters of organization’s culture and values. Leaders act as builders, as maintainers and as watchdogs of organizational culture and values per se (as cited in Bass, 1990, pp. 586-588). Aside from the reality that leaders create culture, countercultures and changing the dominant cultures, the leaders’ role also deals with managing the culture and maintaining them as always acceptable. Leaders must develop new values and recognize emerging values while exploiting existing values. An aggressive approach is necessary at this stage to facilitate the expansion of organization’s knowledge and value base. Organizations may further identify themselves with internal and external sources of knowledge, values and corporate culture. Internal processes involve creation, as discussed above, integration and dispersal of culture within the boundaries of the organization. External process is a two-step process wherein organization members are exposed to outside culture and then transfer them to other members inside the organization (Choo and Bontis, 2002 p. 280).
All of the factors mentioned above are organizational evolution that calls for necessary evolution of leadership functions and roles. More than being integrators and facilitators, leaders are required to have keen observation and scrutinizing skills. For an instance, when the organization is faced with the conflict that emerge from its founders and when maintaining cultures is gradually being insufficient to the organization’s needs and demands, then the organization must congregate with an external organizational specialist – an OD practitioner, for example. So as not to distort existing, effective values and knowledge, leaders must carefully examine the emerging trends in culture and employee behaviors. In this process, leaders could manipulate the culture for their own term and not on the OD practitioner’s side (Harvey and Brown, 2006). In effect, leaders could maintain equilibrium and maximize autonomy while motivating changes even in the presence of an external force (Schein, 2004).
As overseers, leaders are also expected to be cultural change agents in order to unlearn things that are no longer serving the organization well. The process of unlearning involves anxiety, defensiveness and resistance to change from both leaders’ and subordinates’ side. Change must begin with the leaders. When leaders find themselves possessing dysfunctional processes, then these must be changed. Thinking of themselves as change agents, leaders must think of themselves as providers of ‘psychological safety’ and a genuine believer of cultural dynamics and the attributes of their own organizational culture. Since culture cannot be manipulated then the leaders must ‘walk the talk’ and not the other way around. In addition, safeguarding the changes in culture directly points to assessing the cultural dimensions. This can be done through internal interventions to facilitate leadership commitment and the exploring the views of the macrocosm. This involves the acquiring knowledge on their values, shared assumptions, identifying barriers and analyzing them (Schein, 2004).
Task 2 Current and future requirements Current Requirements of Leadership
Amongst the function of leadership and governance, one of the most important is sound decision-making. Though this function is also the least visible since most of the decisions are made behind closed-doors with only the top management to witness, decisions are applied organization-wide, from top to bottom; hence, decisions are observable and often consequential. Optimal decisions are revealed in the course of transcendent dedication, vigilant attention and decisive realization. Transcendent dedication refers to an overarching commitment to the goals of the organization. Vigilant attention is a vow made by top management to maintain assertive and analytic while reaching a decision. Top management’s effort to assure that decisions reached and are executed at every corner of the organization is hereby referred to as decisive realization (Gandossy and Sonnenfeld, 2004, p. 65).
According to Yogendra Malik, there are three classes of factors that affect leadership decisions as personality structure of a leader, expectations of the people around him and characteristic behavioral patterns of the culture that he/she is a part of (1983, p. 78). Other factors that affect leadership decisions are documented as nature and behavior of followership, perceptions of power – sources, use, effects and nature, domains or the specific application of leadership, e.g. political, non-profit, educational, etc., and leadership styles and theories. Some organizations typify styles based on conformity while theoretical applicability deals with human behaviors in the context of leadership (Goethals, et al, 2004).
Future Requirements of LeadershipThe framework of leadership over 21st century organizations is too complex and uncertain than ever. As Gandossy and Efron put it, organizations who are able to build and to destroy strength and speed by other organizations will dominate. The topic of leadership will be embedded on the continuous prevalence of speed and uncertainty and the continued disruption and enablement of technology. Further, demographics will dictate much of the trend in businesses. Contemporary leadership swiftly shifted focus into a more collaborative and complementary as well as knowledge- and talent-based leaderships (pp. 161-165).
Since works are virtually done anywhere, anytime, the span of leadership control widens and crosses geographical and cultural boundaries. Global leaders are honed by means of developed, and continually developing, global processes to assess and caliber talent. The challenge, however, is the systematical movement of such talent in building global capabilities (pp. 168-170). The basics of modern leadership besides the aforementioned is the direct integration of leadership processes in business strategies that support selecting, aligning, developing and rewarding leaders whom act consistently towards accomplishing organizational objectives. The “fit” criteria of leaders will drive them in achieving high performance. The basis would be the measures on a continuum from a growth strategy to a return strategy and from incremental change to transformational change even with uncertainties – physically or virtually (p. 154).
Task 3 Proposals for the development of leadership
HSBC thrives toward ethical leadership wherein customers are served to generate reasonable return for owners and shareholders, provides stable jobs for their employees in a progressive and responsive manner and help communities where the bank operates while staying within boundaries of regulations. HSBC also complies to local laws and regulations, takes apolitical stance and emphasizes performance over conformance. Since HSBC is operating under ‘Key Business Value’ principle, the company expects and demands the highest of standards among the employees. HSBC is very particular with commitment, loyalty, hardwork and integrity.
Aside from this, HSBC is a fair and an objective employer though the interest of the group is placed ahead of the individuals. While also, HSBC uses merit approach with respect t to recruitment, selection and promotion as well as delegation of authority based on accountability. Moreover, the company promotes good environmental practices and sustainable development. More than the usual definition of leadership as communicating the need to the people, HSBC takes into account a less-word-more-action leadership style or exemplary leadership. Such attitude considers transparency as part of effective leadership. Integrity, in addition, is another key term for HSBC as a central idea of ethical leadership.
HSBC fully understand the role of their employees as ‘the eyes and the ears’ of the business and also recognizes the fact that the satisfaction and commitment of ‘internal customers’ are also crucial for the company. As such, HSBC employees proved to have higher productivity through enhanced systems and adequate management. HSBC also safeguards ‘corporate memory’ through keeping the most productive, most loyal and high-caliber employees. In effect, HSBC has relative low employee turnover as documented and find easiness to retain and attracting more employees. For the company, the implications include reduced recruitment and training costs. Within working teams and groups, the profound effects are comprise by a higher-level commitment of the workforce wherein team members are more than willing to contribute ideas and adapt to the organizational changes. Since managerial initiatives also serves as support mechanism, team leaders and members are willingly supports the corporate image and takes pride in their respective works.
Structured leadership is another concern for process interventions. Despite possible clashes between teams, team members and leaders, process interventions are carried-on through clarifications, synthesis, inquisitions, listening, reflections, providing support, modeling, agenda-setting, periodic feedbacks and structural suggestions. The communication model present within the organization is the Content-Processes-Roles (Church and Waclawski, 1998, p. 67). This model can be used to identify what is needed to be communicated, how it is communicated and who does the communicating. This model will provide the organization a focus to integrate effective leadership with self-esteem, performance and productivity. Since the company is already using a technology-based communication, surveys regarding the effects of leadership style to the employees’ performance and implications of leadership disposition in their daily productivity. Likewise, the organization could fully utilize ‘collaborative softwares’ towards pooling different employee perceptions on current leadership and perceptions on using computer-generated interactions. The data gathered will serve as point of discussion on what areas are in most need of improvement.
References
Antonakis, J., Cianciolo, A. T. & Strenberg, R. J. (2004). The Nature of Leadership. Sage Publications, Inc.
Bass, B M 1990, Bass and Stogdill’s Handbook of Leadership: Theory, Research and Management Applications, 3rd ed., Free Press, New York.
Bittel, L. B. (1992). What Every Supervisor Should Know. McGraw-Hill Professional.
Choo, C W and Bontis, N 2002, The Strategic Management of Intellectual Capital and Organizational Knowledge, Oxford University Press, US.
Cheng, V. (2007). ‘Living and Leading in Transparent Times’ – Keynote Speech. Ethical Leadership for the New Generation’ Youth Summit. Baptist University Hong Kong.
Church, A. H. & Waclawski, J. (1998). Designing and Using Organizational Surveys. Gower Publishing, Ltd.
Deresky, H. (2006). International Management: Managing Across Borders and Cultures. (5th Ed.). Prentice Hall.
Gandossy, R. P. Effron, M. (2004). Leading the Way: Three truths from the Top Companies for Leaders. John Wiley and Sons.
Gandossy, R. P. & Sonnenfeld, J. A. (2004). Leadership and Governance from the Inside Out. John Wiley and Sons.
Goethals, G. R., Sorenson, G. J. & Burns, J. M. (2004). Encyclopedia of Leadership. Sage Publications, Inc.
Harvey, D. & Brown, D. (2006). An experiential approach to organization development, (7th ed.) Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Martin, B (2006). Outdoor Leadership: Theory and Practice. Human Kinetics.
Schein, E. (2004). Organizational Culture and Leadership, (3rd ed.) San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass (paper).
Schein, E. (1995). The Leader of the Future. Drucker Foundation (paper).
Silverthorne, C.P. (2005). Organizational Psychology in Cross-cultural Perspective, NYU Press.
0 comments:
Post a Comment