Effective People Management - Example

Effective People Management Name Institution Date Leadership Styles Leadership refers to the activity of providing guidance to a group of people or an organization. Leadership in an organization role entails laying a clear vision and sharing that vision with the rest of the people so that they follow it willingly. It is very difficult to refer to a leadership style as being perfect. Virtually all the leadership styles that are used in management possess both the bad and good sides. To find a leadership style that has no shortcoming is not easy. Goleman (2000) argues that even if a leadership style has more advantages and highly recommended there will be somewhere that it poses a challenge that should be dealt with. There are a number of leadership styles that are used in the running of organizations, religious groups and companies. The various leadership styles that will be assessed in this paper will have strengths and weakness. These leadership styles can be discussed as follows; Participative leadership According to Hay and Hodgldnson (2006), this leadership style is based on a number of assumptions which include; decision making involvement enhances the understanding of the issues involved by those carrying out the particular decisions. It is also assumed that people are much committed to actions where they take part in important decision making. It is further assumed that people are more collaborative and less competitive when they work on joint goals. When decisions are made by people together, the commitment socially to one another is enormous and hence increases their decision making commitment. The general agreement is that numerous people making a decision together make better decision as opposed to one person making the decision. Silvestre (2003) says that in participative leadership style, a leader does not make autocratic decisions alone; he/she seeks to engage other people in the entire process. People engaged may include peers, subordinates, other stake holders and superiors. Many times according to the whim of the manager, they may give or deny to their subordinates, more participative activity is within the immediate team. The portion of influence given to others varies according to the beliefs and preferences. The participation level will depend on the decision type being made. Decisions concerning implementation of goals may be participative to a large extend, whereas decisions pertaining evaluation of subordinate performance are extensively likely to be made by the manager. The strengths of this kind of leadership style lies in the assumptions that were stated earlier. Participative leadership can be seen as a hoax if the leaders ask for opinions that are not considered at all. One of the demerits will include long time being spend on decision making and also if one’s opinion is not considered he may feel left out and therefore lose morale of working hard. This kind of leadership style is also referred to as democratic leadership, joint decision making, consultation, Management by Objective, power-sharing or empowerment (Eisenhardt, Kahwajy & Bourgeois, 1997). Situational leadership style The major assumption is that the leader’s best action depends on a variety of situational factors. When a decision is required a leader who is effective does not choose one single style that he prefers. Practically things are not simple as they seem to appear. Factors that impact situational decisions include capability and motivation of the followers. This is further influenced by factors within the specific situation. The relationship existing between the leader and the followers is likely another factor that impacts on the behavior of the leader at the same time to the followers. The perception of the leader concerning the situation and the follower will affect have an influence what is to be done as opposed to the truth of the situation. The perception of the leader about themselves plus other factors like mood and stress are likely to modify the behavior of the leader (Clark, et al 2001). This type of leadership style is highly variable and distant events like family argument can result to the activity displacement activity of a more aggressive stance in an argument than usual. The leaders put into consideration the likelihood of follower accepting a suggestion and also the importance overall of getting things accomplished. This leadership style is more likely to be used in critical situations and a leader may want to avoid the possibility of failure. The strength of the style is that it is relevant to the situation at hand and many resources may be saved for engaging in trial and error. However not all situations are so much discernable and something can likely go wrong leading to failure of this kind of leadership style (Dailey & Landry, 2000). Transactional leadership The assumptions of this kind of leadership style is that people are more motivated by punishment and reward, social systems are best applied if there is a clear chain of command, if people are in agreement to do a particular job, they give authority to the manager as part of the deal. It also assumes that the basic aim of a subordinate is to do what the manger expects from him or tells him. A leader using this kind of leadership works through the creation of clear structures whereby it is very obvious of what the subordinates are required to do and the subsequent rewards they are supposed to be given for adhering to the given orders. Although punishments are not mentioned always, they are vastly understood and systems of discipline that are formal are always in place (Hay & Hodgldnson, 2006). The Transactional Leadership early stage involves the negotiation of contract in which the subordinate is awarded a salary and accompanied benefits and at the same time the company gains authority over the subordinate. The subordinate is responsible to his immediate manager. When work is allocated to the subordinate by a transactional leader, they are regarded to be responsible for it fully regardless of them having the capability or the resources to carry out the task. When the task is not accomplished as required the subordinate is personally at fault and he call for punishment upon himself for underperforming just as he is rewarded for doing good (Brown, 1998). Exceptions to expectation need reward and praise for going beyond expectation whereas some type of corrective action is used for performance that is below expectation. Transactional leadership is based on contingency in the punishment or reward is contingent based on performance. Transactional leadership is very popular with many managers. The limitation is that the workers as so much obsessed with the material gains as opposed to the good will of the organization. People will work only when they know about the gain as opposed to self sacrifice and determination. The individuals look out for motivation from money and other simple rewards so that they work hard. On the other hand the method ensures accountability and effectiveness in the performance of the organization. Transformational leadership This leadership style has the assumption that people are bound to follow a person who inspires them. Someone with passion and vision is able to accomplish great things in life. It assumes that the best way to get work done is by injection of energy and enthusiasm. Working for a leader with transformational characteristics is an uplifting and wonderful experience. They put energy and passion in everything. They care about all individuals and possess a passion for success. Transformational leadership commences with developing of a vision which is a forecast of the future that exudes excitement and is able to convert potential followers. The vision can be developed by the senior team, by the leader, or come from a range of discussions series. The main agenda is for the leader to buy into it absolutely (Gilmartin & Harris, 1996). After the development of the vision, the next step is to sell the vision constantly. This involves commitment and energy as few people will instantly buy into a radical vision, and some will get on board at a slower pace as compared to others. The transformational leader grabs every opportunity and utilizes every means to persuade others to get on to the bandwagon. In order to get followers the transformational leader has to be careful in cementing trust and their personal integrity moreover, is a crucial part of the package that they are selling out to the people. The leader is selling himself personal together with the perceived vision. The next aspect of transformational leadership is to seek the way forward. As the leader sells the vision he is also meant to seek the way forward. Some of the transformational leaders understand the way forward and simply want to endear others to follow them. Some of these kinds of leaders do not have a strategy yet but are much willing to lead the exploration of possible route to the desired goal. The way forward may not be obvious and may lack fine details but in the presence of a clear vision the desired direction can always be forecasted. Consequently finding the route forward may be an ongoing process and the transformational leader accepts the imminence of blind canyons and failure along the way. The main goal is to make sure that there is some progress in the long run. Dailey and Landry (2000) notes that the final stage of transformational leadership is leading the charge. This is to remain central and upfront during the entire occasion. Leaders who are transformational are visible always and are ready to stand out and be counted as opposed to hiding behind their troops. They demonstrate by their actions and attitudes how everyone else should carry himself around. They should also engage in constant effort to rally and motivate their followers from time to time doing rounds, soothing, enthusing and listening. It is their commitment than is unwavering as much as any other quality which makes the people to keep going especially during the hard times when people doubt the accomplishment of the vision. If the people do not have a strong belief in their vision they the whole mission is bound to fail. The transformational leader has the responsibility of infecting the followers from time to time with a great sense of commitment to the laid down vision. Methods applied by the leader to carry on motivation include use of rituals, cultural symbols and ceremonies. Small changes get big applauding indicating their importance as a pointer of actual progress (Kirkbridge, 2003). Generally, they balance out their attention between the mental state of the follower and action creating progress. The strength of this kind of approach is that it is people-oriented and the belief that success comes first and last via sustained and deep commitment makes many things to be accomplished. The negative side is that it may not be applicable to all situations and it involves a lot of commitment from the participants which may not be forth coming. In as much as the transformational leader seeks constantly to transform the organization, there is the prevailing promise to the followers that they can be transformed to be more like the leader. To a large extend the followers are the results of transformation. According to Gilmartin and Harris (1996), the leaders who are transformational are always charismatic but not close to narcissistic as the pure Charismatic leaders who make it by a strong belief in themselves as opposed to the belief in others. One enticement of transformational leadership is that confidence and passion can be mistaken for reality and truth. The undoing of this kind of leadership is that the belief that someone is right does not directly translate to that person being right and this reality can lead to failure sometimes. Some passionate people have led organizations to their down fall. The same energy that keeps the people going in this kind of leadership, it can also make them to give up. The leaders who are transformational possess huge amounts of enthusiastic energy which if it is relentlessly used can wear out the followers. Another weakness of the transformational leaders is that they forget the fine details and focus on the big picture which most of the time leads to their failure. If there is no one to point out the blindness to, small details can lead to destruction leading to huge loss. Transformational leaders always look out to transform organization, when the people are happy and the organization does not need transforming, transformational leaders will most of the time be left very frustrated. However in case where the organization needs total overhaul such leaders are very useful. In such situation the leaders have ended up saving companies which could have otherwise disintegrated (Jaiprakash, 2002). Quiet leader In this kind of leadership style, the leader’s actions speak louder his words. People are more motivated when they are given credit as opposed to them taking it on their own. It is also believed that aggression and ego are neither constructive and nor necessary. The working of a leader who is quiet is the pillar of charismatic and transformational leaders of gauging ones success not on force and ego but on actions and thoughts. Whereas as they are basically task-focused, they are not bullies or overbearingly unkind and persuade people through arguments that are rational and embrace transactional leadership approach. The leaders demonstrate high level of professionalism and at the same time it is blended by personal humility. They always put the well-being of others before their own such as taking responsibility for failure and giving credit to others for their success (Silvester, 2003). According to Jaiprakash (2002), the highlight of a quiet leader is to some extent a reaction against the praise directed to a charismatic leader in the press. When the organization is doing very well some leaders are overemphasized but the quiet leader continues with production. This type of leadership will not work well when the leaders are faced with people who have a character that is more external. In case the people being led are used to extraverted style then they may find this kind of leadership confusing and most of the time they will down play the leader. The quiet leader is successful by persuading the people by demonstrating selfishness and absence of emotional control as a characteristic that is unworthy. The quiet leader is result oriented and can lead to success of the organization. On the negative side the leadership team can plunge into the patterns of behavior where harmony and peace are valued over any form of conflict and challenge (Jaiprakash, 2002). Servant leadership In this kind of leadership there is the assumption that the leader has responsibility for the followers. The leaders are believed to have responsibility towards to the ones who are disadvantaged and the society at large. The people who like to help others do it by leading them. The servant leader looks out to serving others as opposed to others serving the leader. The point of serving others is to assist them to improve and achieve. There exist two criteria of a servant leadership: the people being served grow as individuals, becoming wiser, healthier and more autonomous and they are geared to being servants themselves. Secondly the point to which the leadership assists those least disadvantaged in the society watching that they are not disadvantaged themselves. Principles of servant leadership include transformation, personal growth, enabling environment, trusting relationships, creating commitment, community building, nurturing the spirit and holding service as the fundamental goal. Empathy, listening, persuasion, foresight, stewardship and conceptualization are some other characteristics identified of a servant leader. Servant leadership is a position that is moral placing the well-being of the follower before other goals (Kirkbridge, 2003). The problem is that it is very easy for the servant leader to be dismissed as easy and soft although the followers are looked upon to make sacrifices for the well being of whole and the servant leader. Servant leadership style is more likely applicable in the public sector. The main challenge to the servant leadership lies in the belief that of the leader that the followers need change. Another challenge is deciding the best part forward. This kind of leadership has been extensively utilized in the religious morals and has been applied by many Christian organizations (Clark, et al., 2001). Charismatic leadership In this style of leadership has an assumption that grace and charm are all that is required to get followers on board. Self-belief is a basic requirement of leaders and more importantly people rally behind others that they personally are attracted to. The leader who is charismatic gathers followers through dint of charm and personality as opposed to any form of authority or power from the outside. The first step that a charismatic leader engages in is such for attention. They move from one person to another paying extra attention to the individual they are conversing with at that particular moment and making the person feel very important in the whole world. A leader who is charismatic pay much attention in reading and scanning the environment in which they are in and are good at picking up concerns and mood of larger audiences and individuals. The leaders then make their words and actions to suit the situation (Wilkinson & Warner, 2003). The charismatic leader employs a wide range of methods to deal with their image and if they are not charismatic naturally they will put more effort to develop their skills. In so doing they are bound to engender trust via visible self-sacrifice and taking risks which are personal for the sake of their belief. They are most of the time persuasive and make maximum use of verbal language as well as body language. Charisma which is deliberate is demonstrated in a theatrical sense where the leader is trying to create desired effect. They also utilize optimal use of story telling comprising of metaphor and symbolism. Many politicians employ this style of leadership as they are required to get around an enormous crowd of followers. Looking at they way they deliver their speeches and they way they carry themselves while with others gives one a sense of being charismatic. Taylor and McGraw (2004) observe that leaders of religious group may also employ charisma and also the cult leaders. Charismatic leaders in the process of making up a group whether it is a business team, cult or political party, will always emphasize strongly on shaping the group to be distinct and clear and set it apart from other groups. They will in the next step come up with an appropriate image for the group, especially in the minds of their followers as being superior to all others. The leader who is charismatic will naturally attach themselves to the group which is identified to such the extend that to join the group is to cross to one side of the leader. In doing so, they come up with unchallengeable position for themselves. The description is majorly based on charisma and takes into consideration varying moral positions. The other characteristics of a charismatic leader include vision and articulation, sensitivity to environment, sensitivity to member needs, personal risk taking and performing unconventional behavior. Leaders who are charismatic want to instill both devotion to themselves and commitment to ideological goals. The extend to which the balance of the two aspects is based on needs and motivation of the leader. Transformational and charismatic leader can possess numerous similarities in such way that transformational leader may also be charismatic (Silvester, 2003). The difference comes when their focus is compared. While the transformational leader has the main focus of organizational transforming, and additionally their followers, the charismatic leader may not be interested in changing anything. Despite the seeming concern and charm, the charismatic leader may well be to a large degree with himself than to any other person. While talking to the people they are very pleasant and appealing plus convincing, and this vanishes a moment later as their attention is shifted to something else. The values of a leader who is charismatic are highly important. If there are positioned carefully towards others they can transform and elevate a whole organization. If they tend to be selfish and Machiavellian they can be a source of cults and imprisoning the mind of the follower. According to Kim and Mauborgne (2003), the self-belief is at a high degree and they are at a likely chance of seeing themselves as infallible and consequently lead the followers to destruction despite getting enough warning. The blind self-belief may also lead them into psychotic narcissism in case where their self-absorption or need for worship and admiration can make the followers doubt their type of leadership. They may be not tolerant to challengers and their feeling of being irreplaceable translates to there being no successor at all. Consequently this kind of leadership in organizations should be applied with a lot of caution since it can easily develop into something else. Not consenting to a different opinion can make charismatic leader cause damage to the whole organization due to high belief in one self. Where the charismatic leadership style is used appropriate a lot can be achieved (McHugh & Verner, 1998). Laissez faire or free rein style A leader who is free rein does not lead but on the other hand allows the group totally to its own. Such kind of a leader allows or permits optimum freedom to subordinates such that they are given a free hand in deciding their own methods and policies. This kind of leadership has the potential of derailing the organization from its course since some individual may misuse the chance of leading themselves. On the other hand it gives room for brainstorming and hence creativity and innovation (Wilkinson & Warner, 2003). Possibility of employing more than one style Having looked at the different types of leadership styles it can be noted that it is possible to use more than style of leadership particularly at different levels of managerial where one understands the kind people he is dealing with. This will enhance the taking on board of individuals with different characters for the common good of the company. So much can be achieved if a suitable style is used at an appropriate level. However it could be source of confusion if the essence of blending styles evade the members of the organization and instead see it as a form of discrimination that kills morale, commitment and motivation. A participative leader who takes up the characters of the other types of leaders has a high possibility of succeeding. Reference Hay, A., & Hodgldnson, M. (2006). Rethinking Leadership: A Way Forward for Teaching Leadership? Leadership & Organization Development Journal. 27(2), 144-158. Goleman, D. (2000). Leadership that gets results. Harvard Business Review, 78-90. Kim, C., & Mauborgne, R. (2003). Tipping point leadership. Harvard Business Review, 81(4), 60-69. Bassett-Jons, N., & Lloyd, G. (2005). Does Herzberg's Motivation Theory have Staying Power? Journal of Management Development, 24(10), 929-943. Brown, E. (1998). Police Motivation Training: The New Frontier. Law and Order, 46(5), 63-65. McHugh, M., & Verner, R. (1998). Motivating Managers in the Middle: The Case of Police Inspectors. The Police Journal, 71(1), 15-24. White, J. (2001). The Work Itself as a Motivator. FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin, 70(2), 7-9. Jaiprakash, G. N. (2002), Analysing the Motivational Needs amongst Policemen: Maslow's Theory Revitalised, The Police Journal, 75(3) 193-203. Gilmartin, K., & Harris, J. (1996). Malcontent Cops: An Intervention Strategy. The Police Chief, 63(8), 45-48. Dailey, M., & Landry, R (2000). Changing the way we do Business into the Twenty-First Century. Royal Canadian Mounted Police Gazette, 62(1), 33-40. Eisenhardt, K., Kahwajy, J., & Bourgeois, L. (1997). How management teams can have a good fight. Harvard Business Review, 77-85. Silvester, J. (2003). Thin blue line to take on a pinker tinge. Sunday Age (p. 1). Melbourne: The Age Company Limited. Wilkinson, G., & Warner, M. (2003). Advocacy group attacks, ‘boys club". Sun Herald, p. 5. Melbourne: Nationwide News Ltd. Clark, D., Olson, J., Porter, M., & Leichner, R. (2001). The Human Resource Roundtable: A Recruitment and Risk Management Tool. The Police Chief 68(12), 29-35. Taylor, T., & McGraw, P., (2004). Succession Management Practices in Australian Organisations, International Journal of Manpower, 25(8), 741-758. Kirkbridge, P. (2003). Management Development: In Search of a New Role. Journal of Management Development, 22(2), 171-180. Chan, C., & Scott-Ladd B. (2004) Oganisational Learning: Some Considerations for Human Resource Practitioners. Asia Pacific Journal of Human Resources, 42(3), 336-347. Read More