The paper 'Managers’ Leadership Style' is a wonderful example of a Management Assignment. In managers’ leadership style there are two extremes scales on one end there would be a harsh and vicious person while on the other end is a caring, selfless, and helpful leader. While there are a few leaders who can be recognized with just one of these, some supervise to adapt themselves found on the situation. However, the success or failure of any of these looms to leadership depends to a large point on the organization's situation being dealt with.
Few leaders in certain settings can make the variation between massive success and devastating failure. Do Leaders Really Matter? The observed effect of managers as leaders on organizational outcomes is minimal for the following reasons: The people selected for leadership positions are those possessing only certain, limited styles of behavior and the discretion and behavior of the person in that particular position is severely constrained. Managers as leaders typically affect only a few variables that impact organizational performance as a whole. Organizational researchers have long studied the effects of leadership on a firm's performance.
These studies have thrown up mixed results. At the forefront, Lieberson and O'Connor's (2002, 120) study of 167 companies showed that environmental factors explained more variation in a firm's performance than organizational leadership factors. Similarly, Salancik and Pfeffer's (1997, 11) study demonstrated that there was a limited influence of mayors on city governments and that change in mayors over time had little impact on city governments. In addition, Hart and Quinn (2003, 555) found that executive leadership roles (i. e., vision setter, motivator, and taskmaster) also had little impact on firms' financial performance.
These findings thus challenged traditional thinking which held that leaders and higher executives hold key to a firm's success (e. g. Hambrick & Mason, 2004, 195). In addition, well-cited studies in the 1980s indicated that leadership was important to the success of a firm. Weiner and Mahoney (2001, 455) showed that leadership accounted for about 40 percent of the variation in a firm's performance (profitability and stock prices) that was not explained by non-leadership factors.
Pfeffer, J., & Salancik, G.R. (1998). The External Control of Organisations: Harper & Row.
Porter, M.E. (2000). Competitive Strategy: Techniques for Analyzing Industries and Competitors: Free Press.
Hambrick, D.C. and Mason, P.A. (2004). The Organisation as a Reflection of its Top
Managers. Academy of Management Review, Vol. 9, No. 2, pp. 193-206
Hannan, M.T. and Freeman, J. (1997) The population ecology of Organisations, American Journal of Sociology, 82 (5): 929-964.
Lieberson, S., & O'Connor, J. F. (2002). Leadership and Organisational performance: A study of large corporations. American Socio-logical Review, 37, 117-130.
Salancik, G.R. and J. Pfeffer, (1997). Who Gets Power-And How They Hold on to It: A Strategic Contingency Model of Power,” Organisational Dynamics.
Hart, Stuart L. and Robert E. Quinn (2003), Roles executives CEOs, behavioural complexity, and firm performance, Human Relations. 46 (5), 543-574.
Weiner, N., & Mahoney, T. A. (2001). A model of corporate performance as a function of environmental, Organisational and leadership influences. Academy of Management Journal, 24: 453-470.