Abstract
Leadership plays major social and professional roles in organizations with the support of basic principles. The type of leadership that seeks to follow the set principles triggers individual human resource potential at the workplace.
Leaders also depend on the rest of the workforce in order to deliver their mandate. Hence, a leader is expected to assume the task of protecting the subordinates regarding poor working conditions, fair allocation of tasks, and risks associated with the workplace environment.
The aforementioned situations may cause negative impacts on work efficiency. In this case, leadership must be designed as a condition, an attribute or ability of an individual subject or collective mobilization of other subjects or individuals so that the set goals and objectives of an organization can be met.
Leadership in Organizations
The concept of leadership
The concept of leadership is among the oldest themes in the fields of literature, politics, sociology, history, psychology, and organizational studies. The study of leadership is sometimes controversial because it portrays different epistemological foundations. These differences directly influence the appreciation of the role of a leader in a given team by emphasizing the personal ability of a leader in solving problems (Edwards & Gill, 2012).
In the most popular management literature, leadership is generally considered as an attribute that can be grasped by individuals due to the fact that an administrator needs to create techniques of attaining the goals set by an organization. This design is based on the perception that it is necessary to make some individuals possess the ability to influence others by assisting them in performing certain tasks.
Leadership is the process of influencing an individual or group of individuals to achieve goals in a given situation. Leadership may also be described as a process of inspiring others to work hard and accomplish important tasks. It is also an essential function of management since an administrator needs to understand human motivation when leading people.
As can be seen, these settings have a conception of cause-effect whereby leadership is seen as an instrument of a relationship to achieve organizational goals. This design is well suited to affirm the managerial point of view in popular literature, which indicates that the success of an action depends on the exercise of leadership (Ponzetti, 2014).
There is an assumption that managers should be (or are) leaders or that the main characteristic of a good manager should be the ability to exercise leadership over a workgroup. However, technical training should be undertaken in order to enhance the qualification of a leader. In management training schools, this subject is addressed in a specific discipline. It is also not uncommon to find short courses offering the development of leadership ability.
The trait approach to leadership
There are natural leaders who are well endowed with the ability to influence thousands of individuals to follow their orders so as to achieve certain goals. In an attempt to identify the personal characteristics of leaders, the study of leadership enumerates common features of naturally-able leaders. At first, studies on leadership in social sciences were not different. Some of the key characteristics of natural leadership skills listed by several scholars of leadership theories include:
- Physical traits, namely energy, appearance, height, and weight.
- Intellectual traits, such as adaptability, aggressiveness, enthusiasm, and self-confidence.
- Social traits like cooperation, interpersonal skills, and managerial ability.
- Traits related to task such as performing random roles, persistence and being initiative (Sinding & Bøllingtoft, 2012)
Therefore, it can be seen that there are several qualities attributed to an ideal leader. The acceptance of a leader in this approach is linked to the acceptance capacity of specific traits (physical, intellectual, social, and the task at hand) that are best accepted by the community (groups, organizations, and society in general). The conceptual difficulty that can be seen in the approach to leadership traits is that it does not consider the heterogeneity of the motivations that each group or community chooses its leader (Edwards & Gill, 2012).
Personal characteristics of a leader do not take into account that each leading person should be placed into a group with different psychosocial dynamics. Cultural factors, values , and forms of internal competition that dominate a group or team of employees in an organization are distinct. For instance, an extroverted leader can be easily accepted in a certain cultural context but resented in another cultural setting.
The behavioral approach of leadership in organizations
The behavioral approach shifts the focus from a leader’s personal characteristics to give more attention to actions. Leaders usually delegate tasks, communicate with fellow workers, and motivate their subordinates. Despite the change in focus, achieving the objectives of an organization remains the main subject of concern in leadership. Hence, issues such as motivation and decision-making are often associated with the input of a leader (Ouimet, 2010).
The latter should be able to master these techniques in order to play his/her roles to the satisfaction of the subordinates. The implication is that management techniques are able to establish the relationship between leaders and followers within an organizational setup. Needless to say, the behavioral approach towards leadership in organizations ought to emphasize a number of key tenets.
Task-oriented leaders care about their jobs. Hence, they tend to pay more attention to the planning and definition of work to be performed. They also seek to establish labor standards so that they can meet the desired goals. Such leaders constantly demand the completion of tasks and often monitor the performance of their subordinates. They are good at meeting deadlines, promoting quality control, and reducing costs (Edwards & Gill, 2012).
Second, People-oriented leaders tend to be concerned with their subordinates. They generally act in a friendly manner and support their followers in performing respective tasks. They are concerned with the well-being of the subordinates. They equally demonstrate confidence, attempt to respect individual feelings of employees, and are sensitive to the needs of their subordinates. Third, a two-dimensional leadership approach entails both task and people-oriented styles.
According to research studies on the behavioral perspective of leadership, task, or people-oriented leadership styles are not polar opposites of each other. Both of these styles may be combined and emphasized simultaneously by a single leader.
The behavioral approach does not take into account what is hidden behind the personal ties that are established within working groups. Relations between members are manipulated, and even when a leader is endowed with a people-oriented leadership style, the subordinates end up constituting means of achieving the organization’s objectives. A leader who tries to behave in a friendly way to earn the trust of the subordinates may fail to express true feelings (Houghton & DiLiello, 2010).
The contingency theories of leadership have been the subject of criticism for a long time. For instance, the approach cannot convincingly explain queries regarding the effectiveness of a leader. In other words, it does not assess when a leader is effective in applying personal characteristics and experiences to solve emerging challenges in an organization.
Of course, this kind of criticism stems from a management view that any leader must be identified by personal ability to achieve an organization’s goals. However, critics also fail to build adequate responses to the criticism implying that it is not a simple question.
Charismatic and transformational leadership styles in organizations
The charismatic leadership theory has gained new momentum owing to continued research studies. This theory suggests that charismatic leaders have “reference power,” and thus, part of this “power” is attributed to the need they have to influence others. Besides, charismatic leaders are endowed with “a vision or a higher level objective (transcendent) that captures the energy and commitment of followers” (Andert, Platt & Alexakis, 2011).
Good leaders help people progress along the desired paths; they eliminate any barriers and give rewards for every positive accomplishment. Thus, transformational and charismatic leaders have great potential to revitalize organizations that are on the verge of collapsing. Such leaders influence followers and provide new and meaningful discoveries and emotions in order to enhance the continuity of their tasks.
One of the main criticisms of the charismatic-transformational leadership approach is its application in situations characterized by periods that require a greater commitment of leaders in routine management.
Transformational-charismatic leaders find their motivations in contexts that require inspiration and energy in order to change a specific situation within an organization. Hence, routine and repetitive work that requires a leader with the ability to motivate the subordinates is threatened by a character that may discourage the subordinates.
Self-leadership in organizations
One of the most recent studies on leadership is referred to as self-leadership. It is inspired by the fact that new forms of work organization demand the productive reorganization of the highly competitive and flexible globalized capital (Edwards & Gill, 2012). The new development requires leaders who are capable of meeting new organizational demands and at the same time, facilitate task performance by followers.
Individuals with self-leadership style are more like a member of a group even though they have the ability to drive self-motivation among other group members. One of the most important elements of self-leadership is an employee’s ability to choose the preferred working environment.
This favors the completion of assigned tasks. Leaders in self-managed environments encourage their followers to practice self-reinforcement, self-observation, and self-evaluation. The leader is charged with the duty of providing employees with conducive working conditions so that they can define their particular objectives in line with the organization’s goals.
On the other hand, the approach of self-leadership can be questioned in terms of its effectiveness in situations whereby a leader is compelled to defend the interests of management positions that do not represent the aspirations of a group. Even if a leader’s authority stems from a delegation located in the chain of an organization, the interests of the organization should always take precedence (Sinding & Bøllingtoft, 2012).
Another key setback of self-leadership is that it has become an elusive democratic discourse. This has occurred because of the need to create a democratic and participatory work environment. There are numerous scenarios in organizations when democratic leadership may not generate desired results. As much self-leadership is a crucial ingredient in the general wellbeing of organizations, the set goals and objectives must still be pursued.
Leadership, power and authority in organizations
To begin with, traditional authority arises when a person or social group follows another individual because the obedience emanates from the habit inherited from previous generations. Tradition is an extrinsic factor in a leader. The traditional authority does not preclude the presence of other key leadership elements, such as personal skills and background training. Second, charismatic authority originates from the personal characteristics of an individual (Edwards & Gill, 2012).
The idea of charisma is associated with personal qualities and organizational position or traditions. In most instances, charisma is the explanatory basis of informal authorities in organizations. Third, the rational-legal or bureaucratic authority is the main basis of authority in the contemporary world. Although the prevalence of modern formal organizations (such as the state, public, and private organizations), this type of authority seeks to treat leadership as an attribute of specific positions that should be legitimately accepted by individuals.
Two other forms of authority have been identified in organizational studies. These include authority by personal relations and technical expertise. The authority for personal relationship is attributed to the relationships established between individuals. Such relations are of a personal nature and related to social ties – friendship, relationships with important people, and so on.
The authority for technical competence is related to the influence on the behavior of others through the superiority of a leader. Followers are influenced since they believe that their leaders have greater skills and knowledge than them (Andert, Platt & Alexakis, 2011).
Leadership and power can only be perceived in their manifestations. However, the concept of leadership should not be confused with that of power. Both concepts relate to each other because they have the same source. Effective leadership in organizations is based on the way a manager uses “power” to influence the behavior of others.
Leadership refers to the style of using power, while power is exercising authority. Therefore, the concept of leadership in organizations should begin from a more specific conceptual definition. Thus, strengthening the concept of power is fundamental when exploring the key tenets of leadership ideals in organizations (Edwards & Gill, 2012).
Leadership and groups in organizations
From the perspective of personal relationships, leadership may never exist without a group that legitimates it. A leader must be shared and accepted by members of a given group. The acceptance of a leader is critical to the success of an organization. However, it is important to note that there are always those who question the legitimacy of leaders, especially when it comes to the decision-making process.
Leaders need to be aware that such situations should not hinder the achievement of the proposed objectives or cause instability within groups at the workplace. Leaders should understand that their roles are linked to resolving administrative conflicts that may arise. In order to manage conflict, a leader must not forget that their interests, personal weaknesses, individual ambivalent feelings, virtues, and defects may influence decision-making.
Therefore, a leader must have a keen sense of self-criticism and sensitivity to accept and re-evaluate the criticism directed towards him or her. Since leaders are still people, they are liable to make mistakes. Therefore, it is natural that some of their decisions and actions may frustrate members of a group (Andert, Platt & Alexakis, 2011). Leaders who are governed by ignorance of their weaknesses may occasion low productivity at the workplace.
When a leader fails to meet the expectations of a team, the leadership style may be questioned. Therefore, a leader should be adequately prepared both professionally and psychologically to play the required roles in order to minimize conflicts at the workplace.
References
Andert, D., Platt, A., & Alexakis, G. (2011). Alternative, grassroots, and rogue leadership: A case for alternating leaders in organizations. Journal of Applied Business Research, 27(2), 53-61.
Edwards, G., & Gill, R. (2012). Transformational leadership across hierarchical levels in UK manufacturing organizations. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 33(1), 25-50.
Houghton, J. D., & DiLiello, T. C. (2010). Leadership development: The key to unlocking individual creativity in organizations. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 31(3), 230-245.
Ouimet, G. (2010). Dynamics of narcissistic leadership in organizations. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 25(7), 713-726.
Ponzetti, J. (2014). Governance in the cloister: Lessons from the rule of Benedict for sustainable leadership in communal organizations. Journal of Leadership, Accountability and Ethics, 11(3), 25-35.
Sinding, K. & Bøllingtoft, A. (2012). Cases on Management, Leadership and Organizations. Gylling: Narayana Press.