Organizational Learning and Leadership - Essay Example

Organizational Learning and Leadership Name: Tutor: Course: Date: Introduction This essay explores the challenging role of followers in organizations with respect to their relationship with leaders. The success of an organization is influenced not only by how well leaders lead, but also judged on the fundamentals of how sound their followers follow. The circumstances surrounding the performance of followers ought to be improved. Followers have increased role in organizations that affect leadership effectiveness and behavior. For instance, members of the executive team can be actively involved in the creation of truly dynamic partnership with their leader (Greenleaf 1998). Leaders and followers are essentially bound by a symbiotic relationship where one cannot live without the other. Followers often face crisis when the company commits some malfeasance or fails. They are faulted for failing to speak up or take responsibility. The current work environment provides unequal obligation to partnership and empowerment. Followers gripe about their leader without helping him or her get back on track or improve. The essay establishes that followers have increased roles to guide the organization but difficult to undertake and requires both skill and courage. Despite the difficult work of followers, there is a movement away from control and command leadership to newer leadership styles that are more coach-like and democratic (Cuilla 2004). The new flatter business organizations demand that followers be responsible while leaders should be more follower-friendly. The modern organization is called upon to engage in shared leadership through servant leaders. Organizational Learning and Leadership Leaders in their traditional superordinate roles are prone to self-efficacies and prejudices extending to those existent in other social relationships. Hollander (2012) argues that followers can become susceptible to perceptual distortions as a characteristic of identification and the self-serving bias with leaders who can strengthen the self. According to Cuilla (2004) in the analysis of some essential psychological processes involved obtains that followers are subjected to their leader's self or ego and further incorporated in their numerous individual cognitive biases. It can be seen that followers may not accept undesired outcomes thus providing resistance to change. When leaders engage in the self as focus of knowledge, they help their followers to conjure or perceive a responsibility to be desired. Leaders have tendencies enhanced further by a sense of being different and power over others accompanied as objects potential manipulation and social distance. Followers find it difficult to adjust to an environment where leaders are not attuned to their needs, expectancies and their perceptions. As observed by Shamir (2007) narcissism is associated with leaders who draw on followers’ affection by way of charismatic leadership. For instance, employees of Siemens in the 60s found it difficult to execute their roles due to low perks and bonuses coupled with selective reward system. On the contrary, followers may be the ones to blame for their failure to appreciate the pressures on the leader since they have not had the position. Challef (2002) asserts that ego-strength is a desired quality in any leader but can be overly transformed and reinforced into ego-driven exercise. Followers feel that the pressures at the top must be managed. Followers must be courageous to help their leaders manage their decision-making processes and stay on track or right direction. Effective and responsible followers have a great role in sustaining the preferred partnering dynamics (Shamir 2007). Where followers or team members do some of things quite naturally, they may become hesitant to speak up in situations when their leader makes mistakes regardless of the intentions. Followers always treat the boss to be the boss (Harvard 2007). For the new leadership styles, there is a growth beyond authoritarian leadership model depicting followers with no accountability and undeveloped model for responsible participation at the follower level. Chaleff (2002) in his book The Courageous Follower, points out that power defines the old paradigm of the leader/follower. Traditionally, the leaders have had the “power” to award perks, bonuses, benefits, promotions, choice assignments because they have the keys to attain them. A relationship develops in which followers shy off from ruining their chances of getting these rewards. Consequently, followers tend to go by the desires of their leaders and desist from creating or offending a negative impression of themselves (Chaleff 2002). In this situation, the relationship based on this type of power fails to serve the organization since the follower or leader shuts down the candor and open flow of communication required in optimizing organizational effectiveness. Harvard (2007) observes that transformational leadership and leadership success are influenced by constructs such as group cohesion, followers trust, agreement on values, self-efficacy beliefs and follower satisfaction. This is possible given that transformational leaders impact follower behavior in a way ordinary people are lifted to extra ordinary heights. This perspective was reinforced by Chaleff (2002) by stating that the relationship between the leader and follower are based on equal power but different roles that orbit around fulfillment and support of the firm’s purpose. Often, the leader and follower are projected on divisional agenda that fails to harness organizational good. The follower experience lack of transparency, disrespect, lack of support and challenges. Many in positions of leadership accept the fact that they do not get candid and full information regarding their staffs. In many circumstances, followers become reluctant to provide negative information for fear of consequences (Shamir 2007). Case in point is Caltex which was recently forced to correct or “restate” their earnings statements after the fact due to errors, malfeasance or even oversights. The burning question in this situation was why people failed to step up and state their misgivings. In circumstances where the focus of both followers and leaders is on fulfilling organization’s purpose, then these challenges are far less probable to happen. In this environment, followers provide full voice to their instincts and concerns so that leaders value, pay attention and welcome them (Harvard 2007). Accepting and recognizing the powerful position of followers helps to fully develop synergistic, responsible relationships in organizations (Hollander 2012). According to Chaleff the challenges experienced by followers are related to power, value of the leader and pitfalls of power. Followers in many situations fail to understand their power and how to use it. They have far more power that goes unacknowledged. The challenge is often in understanding the sources of power, servants and the tools required in attaining the group’s mission. They do not understand their unique vantage point as team member or follower. Some followers do not appreciate the contributions their leader and the value placed in advancing the organization’s mission (Shamir 2007). The pressures mounted on the leader easily wear down good humor, resolve and creativity. The followers can minimize these pressures and contribute to improving the leader’s strengths for the common purpose and the good of the group. Followers have a difficult work in reducing the pitfalls of power by the leader. They have to hold him or her on track for the common good in the long-term. Followers are witnesses to power that corrupt and can only help if they have the skill and courage to speak up. Leaders are subjects of dark tendency of power that followers only counteract with feedback for the effectiveness of the new leadership styles (Kelley 1998). In order to become equal partners with leaders, followers must have courage to fulfill the purpose of the organization. In many instances, followers fail to assume responsibility to the organization and to them. It is hard to hold a paternalistic image of the organization or leader due to expect no growth, security and permission to act. Followers should initiate values based action since their “authority” emanates from their ownership and understanding of the common purpose (Goleman, Boyatzis & McKee 2002). They serve under difficult situations requiring hard work and other additional responsibilities that serve the organization and unburden the leader. They always stand up for the tough decisions made by the leader while being passionate just like the leader in pursuit of the shared goals. Followers often face a challenge of giving voice to the discomfort felt when the policies or behaviors of the group or leader conflict with their understanding of what is right. Most are willing to risk rejection, stand out, to stand up or even initiate conflict so as to evaluate the leader or group actions where appropriate. There is a great quest to participate in organizational transformation. Followers are tasked with the role of championing the desire for change and stay with the leader while mutually struggling with the intricacy of real change (Daft 2008). They ought to become full participants and examine their own need for appropriate transformation in the change process. Taking a moral action is rather demanding especially when it comes to taking a dimension different from the leaders. The perspective involves disobedience to direct order, tendering one’s resignation or appealing the order to the next authority level. It may mean personal risk but sometimes demands such action and justifies service to the common purpose. Kelley (1998) in his In Praise of Followers article contends that an organization of effective followers have leader tending towards overseer of change roles and progress rather than being a hero. With flattening organizational structures, the quality of followers becomes really important. Followers are required to manage themselves well by paradoxically able to think for oneself and see themselves equal to leaders they follow. When leaders do not commit to a higher purpose, followers will not work towards the organizational purpose, values outside of themselves and to certain principles (Daft 2008). Any sight of misalignment with personal values makes them withdraw support through change of leaders or jobs. Followers continuously build their strengths but the standards of performance are high and are continually required to update and learn their abilities and skills. Many gladly seek out extra responsibilities and work so as to stretch themselves. Followers are susceptible to risks they take especially if they are not honest, credible and the courage to speak up. They admit mistakes and give credit where it is due (Goleman, Boyatzis & McKee 2002). Some followers are candid, insightful and willing to take risks by keeping colleagues and leaders informed and honest. In this information-age, hundreds of decentralized organization units rapidly act and process on diverse input within the purpose and design of the organization. This demands a change of approach between followers and their leaders. Conclusion This essay has established that roles of followers are becoming increasingly significant in the current organizational dispensation. Followers while trying to project organizations goals to a higher level find that they have to struggle to be responsible and courageous. They need the tendency to relate to authority figures in the style of parent-child relationship. To followers, memories early childhood deeply embedded the subconscious and in a split second trigger old patterns of emotion and behavior (Shamir 2007). Followers realize that they have to develop the emotional intelligence if they are to regulate these split second reactions and allow more productive and satisfying interactions. They face the danger of the leader-follower relationship which assumes that the leader’s interpretation should dominate. This assumption existing in part largely risks the roles followers. It also diminishes the openness of the leaders. Followers easily abandon healthy disagreement and lose their unique perspective while problem-solving and creativity processes get stifled. Despite that, leaders have an effective primary duty to create an environment where challenge and support prosper in a balanced manner (Daft 2008). Followers may it difficult to challenge and speak up to the leader if they lack the skill and courage to do so. This means that corporate scandals will continue to happen unabated. However, followers create an environment of partnership and learn to give candid feedback to the leaders only if they have interpersonal skills. Organizations can encourage work with a neutral party to help both followers and leaders become more courageous, effective and develop these abilities. Resource List Chaleff, I 2002, The Courageous Follower, Standing up to & for Our Leaders. (2nded.). San Francisco, CA, Berrett-Koehler Publishers, Inc. Cuilla, J B 2004, Ethics, the Heart of Leadership, Greenwood Publishing Group. Daft, R L 2008, The Leadership Experience, Journal of Management, Cengage Learning. Goleman, D Boyatzis, R & McKee, A 2002, Primal Leadership, Realizing the Power of Emotional Intelligence. Boston, Harvard Business School Press. Greenleaf, R K 1998, The Power of Servant Leadership. San Francisco, CA, Berrett-Koehler Publishers, Inc. Harvard A 2007, Virtuous Leadership: An Agenda for Personal Excellence, Scepter Publishers. Hollander, E 2012, Inclusive Leadership: The Essential Leader-Follower Relationship, Routledge. Kelley, R E 1998, In Praise of Followers. Harvard Business Review. Boston Shamir, B 2007, Follower-centered Perspectives on Leadership: A Tribute to the Memory of James R. Meindl, IAP. Read More