Good Leadership In Context Essay Example

<Student Name>
<Name and Section #, of Course,>
<Instructor Name>
Leadership is the basis of the management performance of leading. The leader of a group is the person who has the most impact on group behavior and beliefs. Pescosolido (2001), explains that an individual who put forth, persuades and offers a path and drive energy for the team is the leader, this is the person who instigates accomplishments, give guidelines, reimburses, resolves disputes between fellow members, and pushes and pulls the group towards its goals.

Elements of Leadership

There are diverse elements that characterize leadership. Over 163 studies from Stogdill (1949-1970) demonstrated that the achievements of a leader is associated with different attributes. By actively constructing on these ground rules, one can build up strong leadership skills. Robert House and Philip Podsakoff (1984) have shown the following as the core leadership skills, and they have a great impact on an organization. Vision: Good leadership articulates an ideological vision that is in consonance with the values of the followers. Passion and self-sacrifice: Effective leadership displays a passion for and has a strong conviction of, the moral correctness of their vision. They make amazing sacrifices in the interest of their mission. Confidence, determination, and persistence: Effective leadership displays a high level of confidence and is determined to achieve the set target. Image building: Good leadership develops extraordinary image and tends to use that image to motivate and convince the team.

Role modeling: Great leaders show the team the path by stepping on it themselves.

Selective motive arousal: High prospects from others and have high confidence. Inspirational Communication: Great leaders have the charisma to influence people by their talk. Their communication is inspirational.

Reasons for the failure of leadership

According to research conducted by CEOs and Human Resource Professionals (2011:14)
There are a variety of aspects that adds to the failure of leaders that includes: leaders who are not able to construct associations with the staff members, leaders with inappropriate guidance, egotistical, lack of communication skills, uncertain in providing clear instructions, lack of control, lack of integrity and does not have decision making skills. Napoli Hills (Think and Grow Rich), outlines the major causes for failure in leadership. Most leaders desire to be a good one; however, there are few things that can give a jerk to good leadership. If the leader fails to organize details, it will inevitably spoil the vine. If the leader is not good to serve his employees, they will not serve them either. The subordinates will become resentful if it consists of a do as I say, not as I do” mentality. If the leaders expect that they should be paying for their education, it will spoil their leadership. Other characteristics which may cause leadership to be unsuccessful are apprehension from competitors, the need for inventiveness, grudges towards staff; tittle-tattle at the back and last but not the least stress on the position of their power.

Two Theories of Leadership

Since the early 1900s, researchers have worn various abstract approaches to explaining leadership which includes characteristic, behavioral and situational approach. Notion resulting from these lines of leadership can be found in the theories of transactional leadership and Kurt Lewin theory of leadership. Leadership theories in an organization have developed occasionally into a variety of types, with their own outlines of consideration. Each premises offer a form of efficiently direction-finding business There are two sets of leadership theories: traditional and modern. Here we are going to identify the two traditional leadership theories (Robbins and Stephens 1996).

Kurt Lewin Theory of Leadership and its Limitations

In Kurt Lewin, Theory of Leadership leaders is authoritative. They tend to delegate least authority and become the sole decision makers. They do not involve people in decision-making, as a result, produce least creative solutions. Here high emphasis is on performance and less on people and relies on power, control and hard work to get the job done. It’s a leadership when employees are told what to do, how to do, when to do it and then watch to make sure what it is done. Researchers found that decision-making was less imaginative and less demanding. Lewin also originated that it is more intricate to shift from an autocratic style to participative style.

Observation about Lewis Autocratic Leadership Styles

“It encompasses being arbitrary, controlling, power- oriented, coercive, punitive, and close minded. They take sole responsibility for decision and control of followers’ performance. They stress obedience, loyalty, strict adherence to rules. They make and enforce the rules. They see that decisions are carried out. Powerful autocratic leaders throughout history often have been admired for their capabilities to build up consistent and dedicated followers and take action as the most important influential figures in setting up and preserving instructions.” (Bass & Bass, 2008)

Transactional Theory of Leadership and its Drawback

Transactional Theory of Leadership have more limitations than qualities Rugieri (2009) contends that a transactional leader is more authoritative, has high self-confidence and is usually more obsessed on the job. Larochelle (1995) noted the results with transactional leadership are not important (as quoted in Trott & Windsor, 1999). Even if transactional leaders are concerned with employee needs; they do not propose chances for getting incentive, job satisfaction or commitment (Sahin, 2004). Taking action of appointing a member of staff and agreeing his remuneration is a pattern of transactional leadership. These visions work as a contract in which jobs are carried out in substitute for a monetary or emotional return. Demanding corporation executives may be attracted by the transactional model because this conventional appearance of headship is simple and suitable for an executive, but the transactional leadership has considerable drawbacks that could eventually burnt a business’s foundation. A transactional leader is inflexible in prospect about the working association and believes the role of employees is to do as they are told. This leader uses his official power to coach others on what to do, once the leader has allocated the task, that job is exclusively the accountability of the employee. If difficulty takes place, the employee is expected to be held responsible for the problems. Employees under this type of management approach may turn out to be discontented and displeased. It is not likely to be an apprehension to the transactional leaders, who usually does not take employee emotions, as long as the tasks are accomplished. Transactional leaders must always be there to assure that the work will get done appropriately. Because of the task- focused leadership approach, employees do not feel as if they are working towards a common objective, and they are not provoked by the organizational operation. This kind of leadership is inconsistent as it stimulates only on the foundation level. Penalty and remuneration do not stimulate on the senior stage consideration and growth. This kind of leadership will only be effectual on mechanism teams carry out their jobs and practices, which well shaped and considered reliably with well-built results. This is unfortunate when advanced opinion proficiency level is required to employ. In this, vision is inadequate to its aims and purposes cannot be distinct only with procedures. This also restricts its employees that need to embrace with an advanced altitude of the specialized atmosphere. Encouragement is not efficient this kind of leadership, these supporters are a great deal of aggravated in the exclusive personal ways. The reprimand and incentive are vital to a leader of this stage.

Conclusion

Leadership is the skill to influence people to strive passionately toward achieving group objectives. A leader’s goal is to guarantee synergy in an organization, that is, to portray from the combined attempts of people operations collectively, an end result that is more than the summation of their individual efforts. Perhaps the most practical way to understand leadership is to understand followership. People tend to follow individuals in whom they see a promise of fulfilling their personal objectives. This demands that the successful leaders must recognize what encourages people.

Bibliography

Bass, B. M. & Bass, R. (2008). The Bass Handbook of Leadership: Theory, Research, and Managerial Applications. New York, Free Press
Luthans, Fred. (2005). Organizational Behaviour (Tenth Edition). United States: McGraw-Hill Irwin.
Ruggieri, S. (2009). Leadership in Virtual Teams: A Comparison of Transformational and Transactional Leaders. Social Behavior & Personality: An International Journal, 37(8), 1017-1021. Retrieved January 25, 2010, from Academic Search Premier database.
Sahin, S. (2004). The Relationship between Transformational Leadership Styles of School
Principals and School Culture. (The case of Izmir, Turkey) Educational Sciences: Theory and Practice, 4(2), 387-395. Retrieved January 29, 2010, from Academic Search Premier database.
Benjamin, T. (2015). Transactional Leadership Limitations. [online] http://smallbusiness.chron.com/transactional-leadership-limitations-35903.html [Accessed 31 March 2015]
Empathy and Leadership - Leadership Training from MindTools.com. 2015. Empathy and Leadership - Leadership Training from MindTools.com. [online] Available at: <http://www.mindtools.com/pages/article/newLDR_75.htm>. [Accessed 27 March 2015]
2015. [online] Available at: http://www.rightmanagement.be/nl/nieuw-onderzoek-why-global-leaders-succeed-or-fail.pdf. [Accessed 27 March 2015]