Transforming Your Workplace and Your Life - Essay Example

ARGUMENTATIVE ESSAY Customer Inserts His/her Name Customer Inserts Grade Course Customer Inserts Tutor’s Name Date LEADERSHIP Introduction Leadership is what determines the success of every organization. It emphasizes fewer on organization needs but additional on the needs of the people and the organization someone is leading (Bass, 1985). Leadership is all about styles of approach and not something to be tried on like so many suits, to determine which fits. It is relatively an adaptation to the particular requirement of the people concerned with particular demands of the situation and the particular challenges facing the organization (Bass, 1985). Nowadays people have to develop their skills or tactics that can open up their road to success and to be a good leader (Bass, 1985). They are many factors that can contribute to a good leadership. So, if you are not a good leader naturally, don't worry, you can learn it (Watkins, & Leigh, 2009). One of those factors of a good leadership is communication (Bass, 1985). Communication is one of the most key elements, because if you are a good communicator, you can express your ideas and thoughts in a convincing way (Bass, 1985). And as a consequence, you can persuade people to fulfill their different goals and dreams (Watkins, & Leigh, 2009). A leader therefore must be able to learn effective communication skills that are essential for leader (Bass, 1985). Nevertheless motivation is another variable that plays into a good leadership (Bass, 1985). People tend to give the best of their selves when there is a lot of motivation (Bruce, 2007). People can be motivated by different forces such as beliefs, values, interests, fear, and worthy causes (Bass, 1985). Some of those forces are internal, such as needs, interests, and beliefs (Bruce, 2007). Others are external, such as danger, the environment, or pressure from a loved one (Bruce, 2007). A person's motivation is a combination of desire and energy directed at achieving a goal. Influencing someone's motivation means getting them to want to do what you know must be done (Watkins, & Leigh, 2009). On the other hand, in almost every situation where you are in a group, you need a skilled leader. Groups without leaders or with a weak leader tend to break down (Bruce, 2007). Hence, leaders have to know the skills that theirs teamwork have, recognized them and use the potential to their benefit (Bruce, 2007). To sum up, leadership is an ability that some people have. Nevertheless, you can learn how to be a good leader, if you want it (Bruce, 2007). You can take different training courses, you can develop different skills and techniques to improve a range of qualities which are necessary to be a good leader like good communication, motivation and learn how to work in teamwork (Bruce, 2007). Without those characteristics you can't be a good leader, and therefore, you can't persuade people to achieve goals and dreams (Bruce, 2007). The above argument can be demonstrated in affiliative leadership style emphasizes the importance of team work, and creates harmony in a group by connecting people to each other (Watkins, & Leigh, 2009). Mr. Goleman argues this approach is particularly valuable “when trying to heighten team harmony, increase morale, improve communication or repair broken trust in an organization (Watkins, & Leigh, 2009). However he cautions against using the style single handedly, since its emphasis on group praise which can allow poor performance to go uncorrected (Watkins, & Leigh, 2009). Employees may perceive, he writes, that mediocrity is tolerated (Watkins, & Leigh, 2009). Concern in leadership augmented during the early part of the twentieth century (Watkins, & Leigh, 2009). Early leadership theories focused on what qualities distinguished between leaders and followers, while subsequent theories looked at other variables such as situational factors and skill levels (Watkins, & Leigh, 2009). While many different leadership theories have emerged, most can be classified as one of eight major types: A different perspective of leadership can be seen through a number theories which includes Great Man Theory which presupposes that the capacity for leadership is intrinsic where by great leaders are born and not made (Watkins, & Leigh, 2009). This theory often portrays great leaders as heroic, mythic and destined to rise to leadership when needed (Watkins, & Leigh, 2009). The term "Great Man" was used because, at the time, leadership was thought of primarily as a male quality, especially in terms of military leadership. Early research on leadership was based on the study of people who were already great leaders. These people were often from the aristocracy, as few from lower classes had the opportunity to lead (Watkins, & Leigh, 2009). This contributed to the notion that leadership had something to do with breeding. The idea of the Great Man also strayed into the mythic domain, with notions that in times of need, a Great Man would arise, almost by magic(Watkins, & Leigh, 2009). This was easy to verify, by pointing to people such as Eisenhower and Churchill, let alone those further back along the timeline, even to Jesus, Moses, Mohammed and the Buddah (Bass, 1985). A different perspective is also seen in Trait Theory which is similar in some ways to "Great Man" theory, trait theory assume that people inherit certain qualities and traits that make them better suited to leadership (Bruce, 2007). It identifies particular personality or behavioral traits shared by leaders (Watkins, & Leigh, 2009). On condition that particular traits are key features of leadership, therefore how do we explain people who possess those qualities and are not leaders? (Watkins, & Leigh, 2009).This question is one of the difficulties in using trait theories to explain leadership (Watkins, & Leigh, 2009). Early research on leadership was based on the psychological focus of the day, which was of people having inherited characteristics or traits (Bruce, 2007). Attention was thus put on discovering these traits, often by studying successful leaders, but with the underlying assumption that if other people could also be found with these traits, then they, too, could also become great leaders (Bruce, 2007). Behavioral theory of leadership is based upon the belief that great leaders can be made, rather than are born (Bruce, 2007). Successful leadership is based in definable, learnable behavior. Embedded in behaviorism, this theory focuses mainly on the actions of leaders but not on mental qualities or internal states. According to this theory, people can learn to become leaders through teaching and observation (Bruce, 2007). Behavioral theory of leadership does not seek inborn traits or capabilities. Rather, they look at what leaders actually do (Bruce, 2007). If success can be defined in terms of describable actions, then it should be relatively easy for other people to act in the same way. This is easier to teach and learn then to adopt the more ephemeral 'traits' or 'capabilities (Bruce, 2007). In role theory people define roles for themselves and others based on social learning and reading (Bruce, 2007). They form expectations about the roles that they and others will play. As a result leaders ought to encourage others to act within the role expectations they have for them (Bruce, 2007). They will act within We all have internal schemas about the role of leaders, based on what we read, discuss and so on (Bruce, 2007). We subtly send these expectations to our leaders, acting as role senders, for example through the balance of decisions we take upon ourselves and the decisions we leave to the leader (Bruce, 2007). Leaders are influenced by these signals, particularly if they are sensitive to the people around them, and will generally conform to these, playing the leadership role that is put upon them by others (Bruce, 2007). Within organizations, there is much formal and informal information about what the leader's role should be, including 'leadership values', culture, training sessions, modeling by senior managers, and so on (Bruce, 2007). Contextual factors will act to shape expectations and behaviors around leadership (Bruce, 2007). Role conflict can also occur when people have differing expectations of their leaders (Bruce, 2007). It also happens when leaders have different ideas about what they should be doing vs. the expectations that are put upon them (Bruce, 2007). Contingency Theory of leadership focuses on particular variables related to the environment that might determine which particular style of leadership is best suited for the situation (McCall, 1998) According to this theory, it states no leadership style is best in all situations (McCall, 1998). The person in charge has ability to lead his contingent upon various situational factors including the leader's preferred style, the capabilities and behaviors of followers and also various other situational factors (McCall, 1998).Contingency theory is a class of behavioral theory that contends that there is no one best way of leading and that a leadership style that is effective in some situations may not be successful in others (McCall & Lombardo, 1983). The leaders who are effective at one place and may become unsuccessful either when transferred to another situation or when the factors around them change (McCall, 1998). It helps to explain how some leaders who seem for a while to have the 'Midas touch' suddenly appear to go off the boil and make very unsuccessful decisions (McCall, 1998).Transactional Theory is also known as to as management theory, which focuses on the role of supervision, organization and group performance (Burns, 1978). This theory bases leadership on a system of rewards and punishments; people are motivated by rewards and punishments (Burns, 1978). Managerial theories are frequently used in business; when employees are successful, they are rewarded; when they fail, they are reprimanded or punished (Burns, 1978). In the event people have agreed to do a job, part of the deal is that they cede all authority to their manager (Schneider, 2007). The key purpose of a subordinate is to do what their manager tells them to do (Schneider, 2007). The transactional leader often uses management by exception, working on the principle that if something is operating to defined performance then it does not need attention (Resnick, 2007). Exceptions to expectation require praise and reward for exceeding expectation, whilst some kind of corrective action is applied for performance below expectation (Resnick, 2007). Whereas Transformational Leadership has more of a 'selling' style, Transactional Leadership, once the contract is in place, takes a 'telling' style (Bass, 1985). References: Adapted from “The Wall Street Journal Guide to Management” by Alan Murray, published by Harper Business. Bass, B. M, 1985, Leadership and Performance, N.Y. Free Press. Bruce D. Schneider, 2007, Energy Leadership: Transforming Your Workplace and Your Life from the Core, John Wiley and Sons. Burns, J.M. 1978, Leadership. New York. Harper & Row Eran Vigoda-Gadot, Amos Drory, 2006, Handbook of organizational politics, Edward Elgar Publishing. Harold Resnick, 2007, Energizing Workplace Performance, Lulu.com. Morgan W. McCall, (1998).High flyers: developing the next generation of leaders. Harvard Business Press. Roger Chevalier, 2007, A manager's guide to improving workplace performance, AMACOM Div American Mgmt Assn. Ryan Watkins, Doug Leigh, 2009, Handbook of Improving Performance in the Workplace, The Handbook of Selecting and Implementing Performance Interventions.Wiley and Sons. Stogdill, R.M. 1974, Handbook of leadership: A survey of the literature, New York: Free Press Yukl, G. A. 1989, Leadership in Organizations. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. Peter Guy Northouse, (2009).Leadership: Theory and Practice, illustrated. SAGE. Robert N. Lussier, Christopher F. Achua,(2009).Leadership: Theory, Application, & Skill Development.Cengage Learning. Read More