Leadership is power, exercise of influence of an authority that seeks to inspire the conduct of others (individuals or groups) in order to get them to voluntarily achieve clearly defined objectives. While some have naturally predisposed to leadership, it is also true that leadership develops over time. What is the key to a productive leadership? How to improve weaknesses to achieve positive results? How to mobilize and energize your team towards a common goal? (Chen and Francesco 2000)
According to Daniel Goleman, a Harvard professor, psychologist, author of the internationally recognized best seller "Emotional Intelligence," there are six leadership styles and each style is adapted to specific conditions. We will consider in this paper the different facets of leadership and their influence on the performance of the company through the corporate culture. We discuss here the leadership in a situational context.
Many leaders try to reduce costs, increase revenues and profits to invest in new technologies or in advertising to improve their performance. They neglect, however, an essential aspect of the organization that could make a considerable difference in their pursuit of performance: organizational culture. For our article, we define as the set of working conditions that drive or not a group of people to give the best of them in the line of duty.
Some studies conducted in the United States in 2001; there is a positive relationship between organizational culture and financial performance of the company. Indeed, companies whose culture is dynamic would get a profit margin of 71% higher than companies whose culture is static. To achieve results above the average, it will therefore be able to use leadership styles that have a positive impact on culture in the invigorating.
According to these studies, the various elements of culture that influence the dynamic of employees are:
Clarity: Level of detail that exists in communicating the values?
and mission of the company.
Ethical level of quality high performance established by the company and employees.
Liability: The degree of accountability to the organization. Employees are encouraged to take calculated risks.
Flexibility: Employees feel free to innovate without bureaucratic constraint. They are stimulated to find other ways to achieve their goals.
Incentive: Relationship between the justification of performance feedback and improvement. The best performances are welcomed, mediocrity is not tolerated.
Commitment: Spirit of cooperation and sense of belonging among employees towards the company and its mission. (Pors and Johannsen 2003)
For many years, one wonders about the best way to direct people to an organization and achieve the agreed targets. It seems that an important element of success is flexibility and the ability of the leader that is changing its management style to adapt well to different situations. According to the situational model of Hersey and Blanchard, renowned authors of "Management of Organizational Behavior," the preferred leadership style varies mainly according to three elements, namely the leader himself, the members of his group and the nature of the situation. (Chen and Francesco 2000)
The leader must remain sensitive to the capacity and the will of his subordinate to carry out the task and will have to adjust his leadership style accordingly. (Pearson and Entrekin 2001) Thus, the effectiveness of the leader depends on the match between leadership style and a type of situation, but also its ability to create a work environment that allows subordinates to improve their technical skills and good will. (Politis 2002)
The American consulting firm, Hay / McBer, recently conducted a survey based on 3,871 executives selected from a core group of more than 20,000 executives. Research has led to the identification of six models of leadership, each arising from different components of emotional intelligence. The concept of emotional intelligence (EI) - popularized by Lok and Crawford (2001) is the ability to perceive, feel, understand and manage emotions in a context of emotional and intellectual development (see our capsule "Emotional Intelligence"). This is a concept incorporating four dimensions: self-awareness (confidence), self-control (emotional coolness, initiative, adaptability, openness, and optimism), social awareness (empathy, organizational awareness, orientation service) and social skills (influence, a catalyst for change, communication, conflict management, teamwork and collaboration). (Block 2003)
Leadership styles and organizational culture
According to David McClelland, a professor of organizational psychology at Harvard, the leaders who have at least six skills of emotional intelligence are far more effective than those who have less. Indeed, the first are better able to juggle the different styles of leadership (motivating style, style co, style participatory style of mentor style "by example" style authoritarian). (Pors and Johannsen 2003)
The manager authoritarian control makes all the decisions and demands of his subordinates do their work exactly as desired. Subordinates are not involved in decision making, (Do it because I tell you!). It leaves little initiative to employees who can feel frustrated by the lack of flexibility and motivation to work for the company. Moreover, this style appeals to fear and membership is acquired under threat of destruction or deprivation. (Politis 2002)
Authoritarian leadership is recommended only in emergencies that require immediate reaction and could endanger the safety of employees. However, most of the office everyday situations are not really real emergencies. (Lok and Crawford 2001) The leader using this style tends to think: "This emergency is so important that we do not really care what you feel now.
The authoritarian leader ignores the emotional reality, showing little empathy often gives orders. This model has a very negative impact on culture. To avoid too much damage the work climate, this style should be used short-term and in specific situations. It is important to inform the subject of immediate reactions required to lessen the frustrations that may arise. (Riketta 2002)
Style "By Example"
There are most often the leadership "by example" in technology sectors. The leader is typically someone who excels thanks to its technical skills. It has risen dramatically in the hierarchy and reached the title of "team leader." (Pors and Johannsen 2003) Out if the person does not have the emotional skills necessary for leadership or is not ready emotionally for this position, it is likely that the leader is faced with problems of leadership. (Politis 2002) It raises expectations very high; often up to individual performance (Do what I do!) And can be impatient when the standard is not met. This creates a climate of tension and the subordinate can sometimes feel overwhelmed by the demands of his employer. (Block 2003) Moreover, the leading "by example" rarely gives positive feedback, but mostly negative comments. If the standard is not reached, employee morale is down at the lack of initiative and trust that the leader gives them. The work becomes routine and boring. (Matthews and Ueno 2001)
Due to the adverse consequences of such management on the corporate culture, the leader must take all necessary precautions before selecting the style "By Example." The latter is recommended when quick results are expected. It is adequate if the employees are like the team leader is to say, skilled and motivated in an environment where they need little supervision, such as companies in R & D. (Pearson and Entrekin 2001)
This approach highlights the team members, ensuring above all for their well-being and harmony of the group. Recognized and rewarded for their work, team members are motivated to achieve their goals. (Block 2003) The leader must use this leadership style when he wants to improve the morale of his team and communication within the company or a culture of trust. However, it is preferable to use the cooperative style with another style. Indeed, exclusive use of this approach is essentially based on the praise might encourage uncorrected errors. (Pors and Johannsen 2003)
In addition, although communication is encouraged and allows the sharing of ideas and inspiration, the leading cooperative often leaves his subordinates without clear direction. It is recommended to use the style and cooperative in addition to motivating style. The collaborative leadership is particularly effective for companies whose management is horizontal type (law firm, consultants, accountants). (Politis 2002)
This model promotes the exchange between the leader and his team. Indeed, the manager encourages participatory subordinates to participate in decision making. It does not impose his ideas, but rather he discusses with his subordinates and takes into account their opinions before making a decision, which increases the degree of accountability. Thus, the coalition leader and strengthens confidence in the company. (Matthews and Ueno 2001) People who work in a participatory leadership are generally realistic about the feasibility of projects.
They are aware of their limitations and their strengths (see, Emotional Intelligence). Although this approach may create a situation that drags on, based on countless meetings, it has the advantage of generating new ideas and promotes a common direction desired by all majorities. By cons, it should not involve employees in decision making if they have no expertise, resulting in a real waste of time and much frustration on the part of management and employees. (Pors and Johannsen 2003)…