Good Research Paper On Developing An Effective Leadership Strategy

While there are various leadership models that organizations use on a daily basis to run and manage their affairs many face challenges in their implementation. Most of the commonly used leadership strategies include Laissez faire, autocratic, participative, transactional and even transformational. The choice the leadership opts for will determine the application of a particular leadership style that the organization decides on. There are types of leadership that are effective in some condition while others are not. The responsibility of the management is to analyze and find out which strategy best fits the organization and how can it help the organization achieve its goals. This paper analyzes the use of Autocratic leadership in the Department of Homeland Security. The papers provide an overview of the leadership style of the organization presenting the weaknesses and the strengths, and then finally it tries to give solutions to the problems.

The type of leadership in Homeland Security

Though some experts in leadership argue that it is not good to use an autocratic or an authoritarian leadership, there are other situations that require the use of such strategies. An autocratic kind of leadership is one in which leaders have total control over decision-making. In this case, the subordinates do not have any input in the making of decisions and everything they do are closely scrutinized. Though there are places that this style is not effective, some of the places that might require this style are the Military jobs, border patrol agents, construction managers and many others.
The department of homeland security is an example of an organization using this strategy in their leadership. Looking at how the organization leadership is structured, one can see that the chain of command starts from the top, then it and trickles down to the other junior officers. All the authority seems to come from the top, and the others have to follow the decisions made. The junior officers do not contribute to any decisions made in the departments.
This is the structure of leadership in the department. Ideally the organization has more than ten departments. The head of all these departments is the secretary. The secretary's aid is the deputy secretary. The other members of the head of the department include chief of staff, executive secretary, general counsel and military advisor. These are the people that top the management of the department and are the ones that make decisions on what happens in the department. In whatever decisions they make all the other departments are supposed to abide by it.
Under the head secretary departments, there are other officers that include the deputy undersecretary for management, the chief financial officer, and the chief uniform officer. Under the sectary national and programs director are other officers that include the deputy undersecretary, deputy under security for cyber security & programs directorate, assistant secretary Office of Cybersecurity and Communications. Other officers in this department include the assistant secretary infrastructure protection, director federal protective service, director office of Biometric Identity Management OBIM and the Director Office of Cyber and infrastructure analysis OCIA.
The secretary office of intelligence and analysis involves the following officers. Principal Deputy Under sectary intelligence and analysis, deputy undersecretary for plans policy and performance management. It also includes the deputy undersecretary for analysis, deputy undersecretary for enterprises and mission support. Apart from this there is also the department of the assistant secretary and Chief Diplomatic Officer. This office includes the office of the assistant secretary strategy planning, analysis, and risk, assistant secretary private sector office. The assistant secretary office for state and local enforcement and the policy implementation and integration also falls under this office. There are many other departments under this organization that cannot be mentioned in this paper.

Description and assessment of these leadership models

As mentioned earlier the Homeland Security operates on the Autocratic leadership model. In such kind of leadership, the head of the organization of the departments has full authority over all that happens in the organization. In this case, when the head of the organization has made a decision, then the other members of the organization are supposed to abide by it. As well, decisions in such an organization are always left to the head of the departments. The junior officers in the department are not consulted when it comes to the decision making in the organization. Many have argued that in such environments, such a leadership strategy is effective and most appropriate. Nevertheless, others have argued that this strategy has some failures and might not be effective in such an environment. They often argue that the use of situational leadership could be effective and more productive. But a close analysis of the Department can reveal some of the failures and advantages of using the autocratic leadership.

Characteristics of the Autocratic kind of a leadership

First this style of leadership has little or even no input from group members. Such a style always considers the desires and the feelings of the group members. This style always applies the systems of "you are there to be seen and not to be heard". It thus means that the group member's opinion ideas are left to the peripheral. Such can be both helpful and detrimental to the organization. In the case of homeland security, the idea seems to dominate all the offices. In this case, the group members only heed to the directives they get from their heads. There are no channels to address issues they feel to be changed (Evans &Layzell Ward, 2007).
It is also evident that all the power, authority, and control are only bestowed upon the leaders. At the same time, the leaders reserve the right to make all decisions. For instance, in the departments such as the Office of Intelligence and Analysis, all the authority is bestowed on to the secretary. They make all the decisions about what should happen in the organization without the need of consulting members of the department. The decisions are final and cannot be disputed by any other person within the organization. Indeed, they have absolute power of making all decisions. Such characteristics are typical of an autocratic type of leadership.
Another prominent characteristic of the leadership of the Department of Homeland Security is the fact that the leaders distribute their subordinate ability. As well, they closely supervise and control the people under them. In this case, the people under a leader are under scrutiny since it is thought that they are not responsible enough to carry out their responsibilities. This makes the leaders pay a scrutiny on how the employees carry out their responsibility so that they do not mess up. This characteristic is quite identical to an autocratic kind of leadership.
Quite evident in these departments is the fact that the leaders involve themselves so much on the day to day activities. In some other kinds of leadership models, it is always that the leaders will only be concerned with the management and policy issues. In this case, the subordinates are given the full responsibility for carrying out the day to day activity. The leaders are involved in the close supervision and the running of the day to day activities around the departments. In such a way, the leaders never delegate or even empower their subordinates. All the top functions are left to the management.
Communication is also a characteristic that one can use to analyze the autocracy of a leadership style. Looking at the Department of Homeland Security the model of communication is a one-way communication. In this organization orders and directives come from only the management downwards. There is no any communication from the subordinates upwards. Quite evident in this organization is the fact that the subordinates are not consulted to provide their opinions on issues even if their contributions could be beneficial.
Finally, one thing that is common in this organization is that there are many rewards and punishments. One thing that the management seems to believe is that employee motivation comes from a system of rewards and punishment. They fail to consider the fact that motivation comes from employee empowerment. Though the rewards can play a role in increasing motivation, their contribution is quite limited. It is important that the organization to realize that their merits as well as the demerits of using a particular leadership style.

The strength of the organization's leadership style

Despite the many critics about the use of this type of leadership, there are many advantages that come with it. First, using this strategy ensures that things are done fast. The many delays that are involved with a system that requires a lot of coordination are eliminated when the organization opts to use and autocratic type of leadership. It is evident in this department that it is easy to coordinate and execute activities. This is because the leaders do not just give directives and wait for the subordinates to deliver. But they get engaged in a one on the basis to ensure that the said plan has been achieved. It is without doubt such kind of leadership is effective in accomplishing work that needs immediate attention. The time wasted to seek employee’s approval or consent when trying to implement a particular project are eliminated. The manager can quickly make a decision on an issue and set out to accomplish it (Ghuman, 2010).
This model of leadership enhances control of activities. There are tasks that require control and do not leave room for any error. Such an example is a safety inspection. Any error in such an activity can cause a lot of damages, and the use of an autocratic leadership is important. As such, the Department of Homeland Security takes an upper hand when it comes to handling complicated and dangerous issues. Their leadership strategy ensures that there is a lot of controls whenever anything happens in the organization in the carrying out of any tasks. Such a strategy is the one that has helped the department to eliminate many of the errors that could have occurred. In this case this leadership strategy makes it quite efficient (Drucker, 2004).
This strategy has quite been effective when it comes to dealing with new and inexperienced or unmotivated employees. At times when new employees get into the organization, they might need specific instructions and a follow-up until they learn the job. At the same time, low-skilled tasks and jobs can easily be achieved with the use of this leadership strategy. This strategy works also well when the leaders need to direct unmotivated employees to achieve some responsibilities.
Nonetheless, there are many disadvantages that come with the use of the Autocratic leadership strategy. First, the strategy is not effective for motivated and skilled employees. This has been quite evident in the organization since many of the skilled employees have always rebelled against the scrutiny from the leadership. The other challenge that the organization has faced over time is when a leader leaves the department. In such a case, everything tends to grind to halt since most of the workers had been accustomed to being controlled to work. The lack of motivation among the employees means that in case where the leaders are not around then nothing goes on (Williams, 2015).

Leadership improvement strategy

It is important that the department strives to change the leadership strategy that it is using. Though there are advantages that come with the strategy, there are many flaws that one can identify in the department. It is thus important that the organization finds a way to change how they run the department to make sure that they get the best out of their employees.
First, there is a need to change the leadership model used in the organization. The organization should consider using a transactional kind of leadership. In this kind of leadership, the department analyzes the organization situation and applies the kind of leadership that is most appropriate. Being tuned to only one kind of leadership might be very detrimental. In this case, one can agree that one type of leadership might have its strengths and at the same time demerits. But if an organization seeks for a way to put these different styles and use them in a model known as the transactional model, then it becomes more effective. In such a way, the flaws that are in one strategy are easily covered by the use of the other strategy. The Department of Homeland Security needs this strategy. It is important that they try to transform from an autocratic to the transactional type of leadership (Scardaville, 2003).
Another improvement that organization needs to work on is the need to engage many of the motivational tools. Modern leadership styles recommend that the leadership should explore various ways that can make the workers motivated. Motivated employees have a lot of advantages. First, such employees can bring out the best of their skills and thus improve productivity at the workplace. As well motivated employees will need very little and even no monitoring since they know what they expected to do and how they are expected to do it. It also minimizes the chances of rebellions since the employees will have the feeling that they are appreciated, and their efforts are recognized. It is thus necessary for the department to explore such strategies (Yukl, 2004).
The leadership needs also to enhance their communication strategy. The way the department relays information in the organization is quite ineffective. Ideally, their leadership style only recognizes the use of one-way mode of communication. In this case, the orders and information only flow from the top of the chain. In the event, that the subordinates have something they need to communicate to the organization, there is no channel that can permit them to do so. Such kind of skewed leadership totally hampers innovation and improvement in the departments. At times, the subordinates can have ideas that can help improve the department, but if they cannot relay them to the top management then such strategies might never see the light of the day. It is with this perspective that I urge the organization to look at how they can improve the communication channels (Tannenbaum, 2006).
Another strategy that the organization needs to look into implementing is trying to put in a more coordinated approach towards achieving the organizational goals. At times, you might find that the only person that has the dreams and the goals of the organizations is the leader. In this case, the other members of the department do not care whether the organization has a goal or not. Such cases often happen because the subordinates do not feel like they are part of the organization or if they are responsible for ensuring the good and success of the organization. To them, they just feel like they only have to work to earn a living. It is such leadership strategy that makes it totally hard for the organization to be successful. It is up to the leadership to try and motivate the employees and involve them in the development of their goals (Maier, 2003).
It is also important that the department tries to reduce the too much scrutiny that it puts on the employees. Research has shown that those employees that are constantly monitored will always underperform. This is because such employees will rarely unleash their inner skills and will never be self-driven. They will always wait for the leaders to tell them what to do even though they know they can do the same thing in a different and more effective way.

Conclusion

It is clear that the department of homeland security needs a lot of things to do in order to streamline and makes its operations more effective. It has emerged that the use of the autocratic kind of leadership is effective in a number of ways. One is that it makes it easy for the organization to carry out some of their tasks. It is also easy to manage new employees and get them to learn the skills of the organization. Despite there being a number of advantages, there are still a number of disadvantages that come with the use of an autocratic type of leadership. The most outstanding is that it subdues the motivation of the employees and makes them underperform. It is thus important that the department seeks for a way to use more effective and robust leadership strategies. The change of the leadership style will help the organization to realize some of the things that it has not been able to achieve over the years. Many leadership experts today argue that an organization tries to use a multiplicity of various leadership styles in order to make the department more productive. Though over the years they have been able to do their responsibilities, failures in some areas necessitate the use of such strategies.

References

Drucker, P. (2004). The practice of management. New York: Harper & Row.
Evans, G., &Layzell Ward, P. (2007).Management basics for information professionals. New York: Neal-Schuman Publishers.
Ghuman, K., &Aswathappa, K. (2010).Management: Concept, practice and cases. New Delhi: Tata McGraw Hill.
Maier, N.R.F. (2003). Problem-solving discussions and conferences: Leadership methods and skills. New York: McGraw-Hill
Scardaville, M. (2003).Principles the Department of Homeland Security Must Follow for an Effective Transition. The Heritage Foundation. Retrieved 13 March 2015, from http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2003/02/principles-the-department-of- homeland-security
Tannenbaum, A.S. and Schmitt, W.H. (2006) How to choose a leadership pattern.Harvard Business Review, 36, March-April, 95-101
Williams, T. (2015).What Would Be a Good Job for an Authoritarian Leader?.Everyday Life - Global Post. Retrieved 13 March 2015, from http://everydaylife.globalpost.com/would- good- job-authoritarian-leader-15530.h
Yukl, G. A. (2004). Leadership in Organizations. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.