Site Loader

Introduction

 

Leadership is a main domain in current
dynamic business environments. Cultural, Economic and Political changes are
impacting leadership and may impact on business and organizational development
and performance. The understanding of leadership has changed over time from its
beginnings in history to the present era. The real constraint now for the great
leaders’ potential is fast moving and complex markets (Fernández-Aráoz, 2014).

We Will Write a Custom Essay Specifically
For You For Only $13.90/page!


order now

Despite deep and widespread
study in the area of leadership, when performing a literature review it is
striking to witness that leadership concepts lacks coherence and agreement
(Bennis 1998; house Aditya 1997). As an example, definitions such as leaders
and non-leaders, effective and ineffective leaders, as well as overlooking the
different levels of leadership (Bergsteiner 2005)

 Despite the oversight s, it is widely accepts
that leadership has a direct link to organizational development and performance
(Judge et al. 2002). Many academic scholars have debated on the effectiveness
of the various leadership in the uncertainty age. But, still plenty of basic
questions remain unanswered (Drath 2001)

 

Relationship
between Strategic Organizational development and Leadership.

The way to understand the relationship which
is viewed by many scholars and researchers in the uncertainty age as the main key
which is driving the force of an organization for improving the Strategic organizational
development and performance (Zhu et al. 2005). For example, transactional
leadership helps organizations to achieve its current objectives by linking the
job performance to rewards by ensuring that the resources are available in
achieving which affect the organization development (Zhu et al. 2005)

 According
to Mehra et al.(2005), when an organization wants to outperform in the market
in long run (uncertainty age), it should focus on effects of leadership. This
is because that team leaders are believed to play a pivotal role in shaping the
collective main norms, values and organizational culture along the ages which
creates the foundation to a successful form (Guzzo & Dickson 1997).

 This leader centered concepts have provided by
valuable inputs to study locating the relationship between the leadership and
organizational development where there is Many scholars (Judge & Piccalo, Purcell
et al.2004) have performed their studies in finding out a best style or
combination of styles of leadership that can drive organizations to become the
best in their markets. The main reason for these studies is increasing
importance in touchable elements such as leadership style, employee
satisfaction, organizational culture, skills and competencies which can combine
and coordinate between people, processes and organizational Development
(Percell et al 2004)

According to House and Aditya’s review,
much of the work on the subject is done on superior subordinate contact and
relationship and has ignored some other key functions that leaders perform Further,
they have not considered the internal and external variables which could have
an immense impact on mediating leadership – performance relationship)

 

 

Leadership is
important within Organizations development:

The real enhancement that occurs
because of the real leader appears only within social, organizational, and
professional occasions. Here we will investigate how managerial boards can
influence overall organizational effectiveness behaviors, then we will discuss
the competencies needed to achieve this.

As (Bass 2008) which concluded, “When an organization
must be changed to reflect changes in technology, the environment, and the
completion of programs, its leadership is critical in orchestrating that
process.” Consequently organizations are designating
leadership as a top strategic priority and potential source of competitive
advantage, and are investing in its development accordingly (Day, Harrison,
& Halpin, 2009). For example, in 2009, almost a quarter of the $50 billion
that U.S. organizations spent on learning and development was targeted at
leadership development (O’Leonard, 2010).

The Leadership is Aim to change:

In 2010, (Medtronic) is the global
technological solutions leader that motivated its employees by developing a
mission for the company of “WHICH IS RESTORING PEOPLE TO FULL LIFE AND HEALTH”
(George, 2010)

An organization’s leader can create a
paradigm shift or a big failure, for example, at the end of the last 21 century,
the case study of Nissan which had been facing  a lot of troubles that were helped by the
venture with the ALies of Renault Goals were achieved thanks to great
leadership by Ghosn (Manzoni, 2003).

Ghosn has faced a lot of challenges to
solve these troubles, especially in dealing with the Japanese working
environment; following his great aim for Nissan to get back to being one of the
great automotive leaders in the market. He understood the basic circumstances, that
is formulated the change strategy, implemented it in cooperation with all
levels of management effectively and evaluated the effectiveness of results.

The Styles of
Leadership (competencies):

Leadership is a skill, but the best
leader which is born with leadership abilities. Competency can be developed by
practicing and working on it (Alina, 2013), even there is some researchers are
now considering that the great leadership is a talent like a genetic gift.

There are Several different categories
of leadership styles have been suggested by different scholars and researchers.
For example Bass (1985) stated before the 21 centaury that there are four
dimensions of transformational leadership, three types of transactional
leadership and a non leadership dimension of laissez-faire leadership. Avery
(2004) also suggested four types of leadership.

Despite the regard given to ideas that
are brought up by Bass (1985) before the 21 centaury, they were criticized for
many reasons.

 One reason is that he has overemphasized on
the importance of one or two leadership paradigms (e.x Transactional and
visionary), the classical and organic paradigms. Bass stated that transformational
(visionary) leaders that are more effective than transactional leadership in
most of the times But there is some scholars such as Picco (2005) who have
disputed his ideas. While these criticisms do not invalidate the importance of
visionary leadership they reduce the over-importance given to visionary
leadership.

As Avery (2004) suggested, both
visionary and transactional leadership are valid concepts. But, visionary leadership
applies in a large array of instances such as where there are limited resources
and leader should rely on external supplies rewards (Judge & Piccalo 2004)
or where the situation is complex and ambiguous followers have to largely rely
on the knowledge and the experience and guidance of the leader.

There are some traits or aspects of
leadership for future leaders to attain: Aligned: The leader is mindful is of
his followers, organization mission and shared values. Empowering: Great
leaders are always empowering their subordinates. Serving: Shareholders are not
the first priorities, but the customers are. Collaborating: easing the
complexity of solving business challenges by creating a collaborative
environment (George, 2010).

Great leaders behave according to great

creating will-to-win conditions for all
members of the organization, as in the City Year organization. Its CEO and
Co-Founder Michael Brown wrote: “Without widely held shared values, our society
will come apart. In particular, if we do not deliberately provide our young
people with powerful, positive values, they will often receive powerful
negative values by default” (Klau, 2010)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Leadership
measures in the uncertainty age

To differentiate between the four measures paradigms In the uncertainty
age: the classical, transactional and visionary The nine indices included in
this review are the decision making, range of staff’s authority and power
distance between leader and the staff, the main key player in any organization,
source of staff commitment, staff’s responsibility, situation of management and
leadership in the organization Avery (2004) proposes.

The Classical leadership is the oldest
paradigm and is still in practice in some organizations depending on size,
industry and the ownership structure.

The classical leadership
refers to power and influence over others persons or over individual
team. This leadership can be compassionate or compulsory or the mix of
both. This happen where the leader commands the dependent or followers
to act towards a goal, which may or may not be explicitly, stated Avery (2004). The followers comply or act upon
those commands without asking either because of the fear of the consequences of
not doing so or for the respect for the leader, conformity toward the group’s
goals will be less prevalent.

The Classical leadership has its
limitations in the practice. The first occurs where the
leader cannot lead and has control on every single action. That’s particularly
where the situation becomes more complicated and behind the capacity of any
person or when additional obligation is required to get the work done from the followers.

Another drawback is that this idea
relies upon a “Great Person” that selected few are good in exercising actions.
This makes the leader in charge of the outcomes of the activities and deskills
the followers which ultimately contribute less to the organization (Avery 2004)

 Under
transactional leadership paradigm, leaders adopt more consultative approach. They can takeout  different levels of reference with different persons but the leader takes the final
decision (Avery 2004).

Creating new ways of working together. It entails creating the
processes and structures needed to make the vision a reality. Inventing
involves implementing the steps needed to achieve our vision of the future.

Under this tactic, subordinates are not delegate
and have little potential in the organization away from being able to drag from the
participate or share more of their labor. Unlike under the
classical leadership paradigm, the source of follower’s adherence
comes from the rewards, agreements and the expectations
agreed upon with the leader rather than the fear or respect.

Under transactional leadership paradigm
somewhat skilled staff is required as higher degree of subordinate involvement
is required

The spotlight was on visionary
(translational) leadership paradigm in the last few decades (Bass 1985 House
1977). It added an additional attention in to
organizational studies due to visionary leadership and emotional involvement of
employees in organizations. The basic presumption in this paradigm is
that leader has a vision to be successful and the followers believe in it and
embrace the vision to work with commitment and enthusiasm towards achieving it.
Avery(2004) pointed out the limitations of this approach although overwhelming
positives in the literature. Nadler and Tuschman (1990) pointed out that the
over trust that lay upon the leader may end with disappointment to the follower
if the objectives are not met. Additionally, followers may become over
dependent on the leader expecting that he has everything under control and
innovation may be hindered as followers reluctant to disagree with the leader

 Visionary leadership shares more decision
making power with the followers with more collaborative approach. Visionary
leaders share their problems with the followers and seek consensus before
making the final decision. Visionary leaders authorize the followers
giving them the autonomy than both the classical and transactions for
leadership. The source of
follower’s commitment comes from the leader’s charisma and the structure and
the complexity of the environment where involvement of both leader and
followers are needed in managing the affairs. More skilled and knowledgeable
follower base which can share the same vision as the leader is concerned under
this paradigm the forth leadership paradigm is identified as organic leadership
where the study is relatively new.

 

Drath (2001), the concept was
recently introduced and further expanded by Avery (2004). This approach is likely
to blur the variance between leaders and followers. This sample relies on mutual
actions where team member work based on their roles and power attached to the
role rather than the power attached to the position (Raelin 2003). Organic leadership approach is
applicable in organizations where deep expertise is needed and the situations
are more complex where one leader cannot lead in the whole process. As a result
the outcome is emerged as a team making all leaders in their respective
expertise areas of work (Avery 2004

 Under
this approach, there are no formal leadership structures. Instead emerging
leadership rather than appointing individuals for leadership positions

However, in Kanter (1989) argued that
although organic leadership promoted autonomy and freedom, this may result in
loss of control and increased uncertainty. Therefore self control and
self-organization is required in such instances. Furthermore, unlike other
paradigms of leadership, organic leadership is not relied upon formal leaders.
It relies upon the skills and capacity of individuals to make decisions and solve
problems in the interest of the organization. The idea revolves on “Self
leading” organizational.

                

Post Author: admin

x

Hi!
I'm Erica!

Would you like to get a custom essay? How about receiving a customized one?

Check it out