The paper 'Organisational Leadership and Performance in Globalized World " is a great example of management coursework. For a long time, diverse scholars and international agencies have made extensive efforts to define the concept of leadership. Thus, this concept has undergone enormous discourses culminating in the generation of a proliferation of literature in different realms of academia, central to them being realms of organizational science as well as management. Bernard Bass who is one of the most renowned scholars of leadership perceived leadership as a ‘ universal phenomenon’ and proceeded to define it as the interaction of two or more members of a certain group which in most cases entail a structuring or restructuring of the situation and the opinion and anticipations of the members (Ver, 2009). At the organizational level, leadership has been perceived to the ability as embedded in an individual to effectively motivate, influence and empower other people to participate towards the success and effectiveness of an institution in which they derive membership (House et.
al, 1999). Nonetheless, despite the diversity of definitions, there has been a consensus among scholars that leadership has undergone massive changes within the context of the globalized environment. Against this background, this paper will explore the ways in which leadership has changed within the context of a globalized environment, over time.
In addition, it will analyze the leadership profile and communication styles of Steve Jobs, the Apple CEO and the person credited for making this company evolve into becoming one of the most recognized brands in the realms of advanced technologies. Changes in leadership overtime According to Mind Resources Institute of Learning and Innovation (2005), leadership has undergone extensive transformations over time which have been characterized by a paradigm shift from the autocratic model towards directive leadership in the turn of the 20th century to a more democratic and participative leadership model in the contemporary world which is characterized by a globalized environment. These changes of leadership can be attributed to a synergy of factors which includes but not limited to the transference of the attitude among different people as well as technological advancements.
This has made it fundamental for the leaders in organizations, for instance, the human resource managers to engage in planning for the future and adapting to the trends dynamics and eventually ensure that their respective organizations achieve the best outcomes both in the short and in the long terms (Mind Resources Institute of Learning and Innovation, 2005). Some of these epochs of leadership changes are analyzed in the subsequent section. Authoritarian/autocratic leadership This model of leadership was founded on a top-down system of management, exact orders and strict rules.
According to Vliert (2006), autocratic leaders often function in a predominantly self-centred manner and unilaterally engage in the decision-making process.
In addition, they closely supervise the undertakings of their subordinates and seldom engage the input of those below them. In this model of leadership, there is a great demand for compliance with the set rules and regulations from all the concerned parties, mostly those from the lower echelons in the management structure or rank. This form of leadership is concretely entrenched on the traditional perspective of leadership based on respect for status and positional authority (Dinham, 2007). There tends to be no consultation process in this model between the employees and their superiors and in its place, those high in the management framework envisage their orders being obeyed without any questions.
In addition, the use of stringent rules and regulations make the utility of punishment and sanctions aimed at deriving compliance from the subordinates making the leaders become feared as opposed to being liked or respected (Dinham, 2007). This model of leadership received much unpopularity in the organizational set-up since it limited the extent of innovation and creativity among the employees. This is based on the fact that it primarily promoted compliance with the set down processes in production limiting any chances of engaging in pursuit for alternative methods of production that will result in enhancement of the products.
This model of leadership is often associated with the periods during and after the agrarian revolution (Vliert, 2006). Nonetheless, it is worth noting that some countries, mostly in the developing world are still governed through autocratic leadership which spills over to the management of the organizations in these countries. Thus, this model of leadership is propelled by the members of the governing class who often have indirect collaborations with merchants and retainers in organizations (Vliert, 2006). Through the process of extended internalization and socialization, the subordinate members in these organizations among the societies in agrarian counties which are gradually industrializing have come to learn and accept the values of following orders and have become alienated to believe in the effectiveness of autocratic leadership (Vliert, 2006).
Nonetheless, the extent of globalization of the environment in this epoch can be perceived to be limited.
Barbuto, J. (2005). Motivation and Transactional, Charismatic, andTransformational
Leadership: A Test ofAntecedents. Journal of Leadership and Organizational Studies, 1 1(4), 25-40
Dinham, S. (2007). Authoritative leadership, action learningand student accomplishment.
Retrieved September 19, 2012 fromhttp://www.acer.edu.au/documents/RC2007_Dinham-AuthoritativeLeadership.pdf.
Dolatabadi, H.R & Safa, M. (2010). The Effect of Directive and Participative Leadership Style
on Employees’ Commitment to Service Quality. International Bulletin of Business Administration, 1(9), 31-42.
House R.J. et. al. (1999). Cultural influences on leadership and organizations: Project Globe.
Retrieved September 19, 2012 from http://t-bird.edu/wwwfiles/sites/globe/pdf/process.pdf
Huang, X. et. al. (2009). Does participative leadership enhancework performance by inducing
empowerment or trust? Thedifferential effects on managerialand non-managerial subordinates. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 31, 122-143.
Isaacson, W. (2012).The Real Leadership; Lessons of Steve Jobs. Harvard Business Review,
Mind Resources Institute of Learning and Innovation (2005). The Evolution of Leadership.
MRILI, 2(2), 8-9.
Philo, J. (2007). Steve Jobs: Leadership Analysis. Retrieved September 19, 2012 from
Somech, A. (2003). Relationships of participative leadershipwith relational demography
variables:A multi-level perspective. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 24, 1003–1018.
Ver, H.L. (2009). Conception of Leadership. Background paper 04, Canberra: Developmental
Vliert, E.V. (2006). Autocratic leadership around the globe; Do climate and wealth drive
leadership culture?. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 37(1), 42-59.
Wendt, H. et. al. (2009). Leadership and team cohesiveness across cultures. The Leadership
Quarterly, 20, 358–370.
West, T.W. et. al (1996). Reflections on Leadership. CAUSE Professional Paper Series no. 15,
Boulder, Colorado: CAUSE.