Leadership
at Play
Leslie
K. Penny
Module
6 Course Project
Chancellor
University
Abstract
The following essay
provides a thorough explanation of the behavioral theories and an opinion
whether an individual's leadership style is fixed. The relationship between leadership style
and motivation are touched on briefly while answering the questions as to which
motivational strategies are the most important for a high-profile leader. Lastly, the different types of conflict are
explained as well as what a leader can do to resolve any conflict that may come
in between individuals and/or team efforts.
Leadership
at Play
Effective management is an extremely important concept in
the business world. Many factors are
intertwined in each organizational management team including the behavior of
all involved where behavioral theories come into play, the different styles of
leadership involved with their motivational aspects and organizational
conflicts, just to name a few. The
following essay will reflect on the topics mentioned above as well as expanding
all that is involved, because without those effective managing skill, a
business can fail, affecting the lives of many.
An effective manager must have an arsenal of skills and
characteristic traits to help deal with problems that arise, communication
issues, conflict in the work place, negotiation tactics and the mentality of
self improvement and self awareness. The
qualities a manager represents should include excellent communication,
enthusiasm, proficiency, staying calm and collected under pressure, be able to
delegate tasks to the best benefit of all involved, team effort and building
skills, incorporate ethics for goal setting, honesty, integrity, courage,
commitment, sincerity, compassion, determination, etc. (Francis, 2007).
Many of the adjectives mentioned above concerning the
skills and characteristics of effective leadership go hand in hand with that
individuals behavior. Several studies
were conducted by Universities such as Michigan and Ohio and the managerial
grid study to "develop a fuller understanding of leadership
behaviors" (Griffin, 2012).
The four most important situational theories of leadership are the
least-preferred coworker (LPC), the path-goal theory, Vroom's decision tree
approach, and the leader-member exchange (LMX) approach.
When it comes the first theory mentioned, least-preferred
coworker, this writer can believe that this theory is true and accurate in many
businesses across the world. Fred
Fiedler developed a scale to identify whether a leader's style is
relationship-orientated or task-orientated by having a person in a leadership
role rate the one individual they would least want to work with. A higher score indicates positive qualities
and would equate to a relationship-orientated leader while a lower score indicates
negative qualities and would equate to a task-orientated leader (Griffin, 2012). The path-goal theory suggests "that the
primary functions of a leader are to make valued or desired rewards available
in the workplace and to clarify for the subordinate the kinds of behavior that
lead to those rewards" (Griffin, 2012).
Vroom's Decision Tree Approach "is used by leaders to determine
whether they should make a decision alone or involve a group, and to what
extent the group should be involved" (Vroom-Jago Decision Model, 2013). The leader-member exchange approach
"stresses that leaders have different kinds of relationships with
different subordinates" (Griffin, 2012).
This writer believes that everyone has the opportunity to
change and can if they put their minds to it.
With that being said, however, I do believe that many individuals do, in
fact, have a fixed style of leadership.
Unless one has a personality disorder, an individual will always take
the route of least resistance. An
individual can try hard and may accomplish changing their leadership style for
a short time, but when things get rough, frustrating, or stressful, they more
than likely will return to the style that most suits them. For example, say someone uses Vroom's
Decision Model as their leadership style.
If it's working for them and all involved, results are good then why try
to conform to a new leadership style? I
personally do not like the least-preferred coworker theory and don't feel it is
a professional way to lead. However, it
is probably one of the more prevalent situational approaches to leadership.
I personally don't behave any different no matter the situation at
hand.
Every leadership style has its pros and cons in regards
to helping motivate employees. The pro's
to Fiedler's contingency theory is that it is "extremely well researched,
given the stated parameters, it can assist enormously with leaders with good
personal relations are matched to a poorly structured task environment, for
leaders who are impersonal, they are placed in well task structured environment
and it is more flexible than a "one takes all" theory" while the
cons include "LPC scale is subjective, and characteristics are relative in
context, even according to Fiedler, the LPC score is valid only for groups that
are closely supervised and does not apply to "open ones" such as
teams and it is questionable whether Fiedler's contingency theory is valid in
all situations, such as when neither the task is well defined and no choice of
leaders is to be had, except ones with bad personalities" (Fiedler's Contingency Theory, 2013).
The path-goal theory has several pros that include
"in a situation where something needs to be done in a short time-such as
emergencies and complicated situations in which there is a time constraint,
this method may be preferable, the revised theory adds more with respect to
group participation, making it more amendable to use in groups who are
knowledgeable and intelligent and it has a common sense ring to it and the
ideas are easy to convey" while cons include "the theory assumes that
the group members do not know what is good for them, it is inherently
undemocratic; if the leader has flaws the whole method stands a good chance of
failure; leaders are not always rational, and a course of action might be based
on delusion, thus jeopardizing group members and the leader-led-task system
could collapse, if there is too much
dependence on the leader and where either something happens to the leader or he
simply cannot carry out his leadership functions" (Path-Goal Theory-Rober House, 2013).
The pros for Vroom's Decision Tree Approach include is
that it "is highly flexible with respect to the choices a leader can make
in effecting decisions with a range from highly dictatorial to democratic; the
method has a mechanical procedure to arrive at a decision making process; and
the idea of a procedure like this can be seen as "objective", that
the results were not arrived at by a non-specific method" while the cons
are "it is questionable whether this model cn be used in large groups; the
decision procedure may be too mechanical and note take into account subtleties
in decision making, such as changing emotions and, for that matter change, in
general; and the questions may not be precise enough and sufficiently
contextual, as in "Is the quality of the decision important?"
"Important to whom or what and in what time frame" are the
questions" (Vroom-Jago Decision Model, 2013).
Lastly we have the cons of pros of Leader-Member Exchange
Theory. Pros include "LMX is
intuitive. It is what can be expected
from a leader-group structure; the theory points to what people could do to
strengthen or weaken the leadership dynamics, the theory explains the dynamic
of age-old problems of cronyism, the mechanics of loyalty to a leader and
corruption and provides a structure for not only modeling specific situations
but solutions to problems" while the cons include "LMX theory does
not account for leadership personalities very well; LMX is so intuitive that it
appears to be obvious. One asks,
"What really is new and what is left out?" It leaves the reader with a
sense of emptiness; and how values affect the group dynamics is left out" (Leader-Member Exchange Theory -LMX, 2013).
With all that being said, one can see how the pros and
cons affect those involved especially motivation. The most effective leader can provide the
proper motivation for their employees.
I prefer the path-goal theory in regards to motivation. When individuals are able to work together as
a group or by themselves feel a sense of morality that bond them together
giving them the motivation needed to accomplish the task. A good leader can emphasize this without
being pushy or obnoxious.
I feel the motivational strategies that are most
important for a high-profile leader are all of them to include empowerment and
participation, alternative forms of work arrangements, merit reward system,
incentive reward system, team and group incentive reward systems, common team
and group reward systems and executive compensation. They all are used in various situations and
places and have their own level of importance.
However, a president or CEO would realize soon enough which motivational
strategy works best for their people, their business and their bottom dollar.
Motivation is great in the workplace. What is not so great is conflict. This can come from interpersonal conflict
(conflict between two or more individuals, inter-group conflict (conflict
between two or more organizational groups) and conflict between organization
and environment know as inter-organizational conflict. Managers can cope with conflict by
stimulating, controlling or resolving and eliminating conflict. Stimulating conflict can bring conflict to a
constructive end by increasing competition between individuals and teams,
hiring outsiders to shake things up and by changing established procedures (Griffin, 2012).
Managers can control conflict by "expanding their
resource base, enhance coordination of interdependence, set super ordinate
goals and by matching personalities and work habits of employees" (Griffin, 2012). Managers can resolve and eliminate conflict
by avoiding it all together, "convince conflicting parties to
compromise" and by bringing "conflicting parties together to confront
and negotiate conflict" (Griffin, 2012).
All of the options listed can put an individual, team or business back
on track when they lose prospective of the big picture by letting conflict get
in the way.
To conclude, there would not be so many styles of
leadership if all managers behaved in the same manner. Just like with anything, diversity is ever
prevalent whether it be behavior theories of leadership, different motivational
strategies and the different ways to resolve conflict in the work place. Everyone has their own opinion on the matter,
but ultimately my opinion is all that matters in regards to this essay and I am
of the opinion that an individual's style of leadership is the same in every
situation. As discussed, motivation is
an important aspect in a managers repertoire as well as the means to resolve
conflict in their organization.
Works Cited
Fiedler's Contingency Theory. (2013). Retrieved 02 15, 2013, from Leadership-Central:
http://www.leadership-central.com/fiedler%27s-contingency-theory.html#axzz2LBe9YH8n
Francis, M. (2007, 01
20). Effective Management. Retrieved 02 14, 2013, from Changing Minds:
http://changingminds.org/articles/articles/effective_management.htm
Griffin, R. (2012). Fundamentals
of management. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company.
Leader-Member
Exchange Theory -LMX. (2013).
Retrieved 01 17, 2013, from Leadership-Central:
http://www.leadership-central.com/leader-member-exchange.html#axzz2LBe9YH8n
Path-Goal
Theory-Rober House. (2013).
Retrieved 02 17, 2013, from Leadership-Central:
http://www.leadership-central.com/path-goal-theory.html#axzz2LBe9YH8n
Vroom-Jago Decision
Model. (2013). Retrieved 02 16,
2013, from Decision Making Confidence: http://www.decision-making-confidence.com/vroom-jago-decision-model.html
Vroom-Yetton-Jago
Decision-making Model of Leadership.
(2013). Retrieved 02 17, 2013, from Leadership-Central:
http://www.leadership-central.com/Vroom-Yetton-Jago-decision-making-model-of-leadership.html#axzz2LBe9YH8n
No comments:
Post a Comment