¶ … Leadership For any company or organization to function smoothly, there must be some elaborate management system in place. This is crucial as proper leadership would focus on guiding the company or organization through teamwork projects and is needed to keep everyone in the team motivated and willing to keep working no matter what. Understanding the leadership concepts and the different leadership theories makes those in charge better leaders. Some of these notable theories include:

The Leadership Exchange (LMX) theory

This theory focuses on the building of individual one on one relationship between the leader and every employee in the team rather than leading the team as a whole (Lunenburg, 2010). Since each relationship is bound to vary in quality, the leader will always have a good relationship with majority of the team regardless of the few bad relationships. These relationships (commonly referred to as dyads) give the leader a better control over the organization and could be either in-group or out-group in nature (Luneburg, 2010).

To begin the dyadic relationship, the leader has to initiate an in-group or out-group relationship with one or more members of the organization early. The in-group members will be involved in making decisions and carry some extra responsibilities (Luneburg, 2010). By allowing these group members some bit of advantage, the leader can let these higher-level subordinates to handle a part of his responsibilities in a non-contractual setting.

Of all the leadership theories in place, none fails to acknowledge the power of roles in management. The leader's ability to motivate and influence commitment from his or her followers has a direct impact on the effective management of all the human resources in the company (Komives & Dugan, 2011). Additional theories that take after this school of thought include the situational, path-goal, contingency and behavioral theories (Komives & Dugan, 2011).

Case analysis

The article "Leadership, A Key Factor to a Successful Organization," a good leader ought to be a master, a good strategist with the power to direct, organize and convince employees into working together towards achieving a common goal (Vacar & Miricescua, 2013). It goes on and argues that a good leader ought to convert his followers into leaders and leaders into agents of change. This is proof that leadership motivation is gradual and it should never end no matter what.

It is the work of the leader to encourage all the employees into birthing new ideas. Moreover, he or she should motivate them into implementing these ideas and bringing about acceptable change to the entire organization. This resonates the sentiments of the leadership theory on what true leadership ought to be (Vacar & Minicescua, 2013).

According to a Romanian study on a set of 102 managers made up of 55% women, a big number of the leadership is female. Moreover, the managers were mostly between 20 and 30 years old (61%). The majority of these managers, however, were mid-tier managers who were in charge of other teams. Even though this is an attempt at creating the in-group cycle, the test subject still showed a failure in dealing with straight relationships with individual employees.

Even though the LMX theory proposes better relationships between in-group subordinates and the leaders, there will be a bottleneck in production if the subordinates do not translate the same to the groups under their control (Lunenburg, 2010).

In addition to this, a better part of the test subjects admitted the fact that they practice leadership rather than use their role to help mobilize and motivate the employees in the team (Vacar & Miricescua, 2013). A total of 68% subscribe to the theory of decision-making and using involvement and rewards to motivate employees into productivity while around 32% use strict rules to coerce and force the employees into working right (Vacar & Miricescua, 2013).

The fact that all the members of the outer-group are only supervised by the flimsy hold of their contracts goes against the proposal of the LMX. The leader only provides support as stipulated by the contract but can never go beyond this limit in attempt to make the employee more relaxed and willing to work harder (Lunenburg, 2010). This gives the illusions that the out-group employees are just hired hands and never can be part of the company. This has a negative impact on true leadership since it does not let them feel the urge to work harder and better (Lunenburg, 2010).

Positive Indicators of the Leadership Theories

A second group of managers, however had a complete control of their outer-group employees and had a perfect understanding of what tasks each employee does. They could connect with these employees at a personal level (Vaca & Miricescua, 2013). A total of 46% of the respondents however admitted paying more attention to the daily goals and tasks rather than on people. The managers concerned with each employee...

They take the time to understand people and take them for what they are rather than treat them as means to attaining a target (Vacar & Miricescua, 2013).
Conclusion

Leading is different from management. A good leader has more than the day's goals in mind. He or she will take time to understand the employees. Such a connection evokes willingness and a desire to work harder from the employee hence making a fruitful organization.

Question 2

Introduction

Being a leader is not enough in itself. Evoking a sense of belonging and encouraging a self-driven reaction from the employees, is key. Addressing each employee's basic needs and making him or her feel important increases the willpower to work harder and for longer. This is what differentiates leaders from managers. This is transformation leadership.

According to the transformation leadership theory, a leader ought to focus on appealing to the employee's need for achievement, self-esteem and self-actualization (Malloch, 2014). Transformation leadership focuses on improving both the leader's and follower's motivation day by day.

Such leaders will pay attention on individuals, work on intellectual stimulation and give some inspiration to help the employee attain apparently extraordinary goals. Such leaders could easily pass as risk takers who are willing to try out new options and always look at errors as chances for more growth. Moreover, these leaders are morally upright and strong individuals who can afford to look beyond self-interest into the common good (Malloch, 2014).

Case Analysis

The article on beyond transformational leadership to Greater Engagement points out that most health care leaders are struggling with the constant emerging complexities in the sector as well as balancing their own personal well-being. This reveals contrasting features from the common leadership theories, which are considered limitations by Malloch (2014). These limitations include focusing on individuals. No attention is paid to the organizational culture, comprehensive thinking, and teamwork. Power decision and decision making is directed and facilitated by transformational leadership (Malloch, 2014).

This model assumes that the leader is all powerful and he or she determines how and when to empower others (Malloch, 2014). Decision making within these bureaucratic structures of committees limits decision making as visioning rests with the leader. The organization, leadership and direction come from the leaders, board of directors and the executive team (Malloch, 2014). The responsiveness of patient point care depends on how effective your transformational leadership is. It involves various decision-making levels until the final decision reaches the patient. The organizational context is neglected in this theory. Political, economic and social factors have no impact on the transformation of the individual (Malloch, 2014).

Closely analyzing the 'Beyond Transformational Leadership to Greater Engagement' reveals that the leadership is likely to change in future. The first thing in transformational leadership is about facilitating people while complexity leadership involves facilitating people. The complexity leadership model distributes leadership across the organization (Malloch, 2014). Transformational leaders know the weakness in this type of leadership as seen through their daily struggles (Malloch, 2014). Even so, moving to a better leadership system requires careful planning and setting of new goals by the whole team.

The ultimate leadership structure should be based on principles including principles on safety, respect, timeliness and evidence. Such a structure tends to be more effective compared to one that focuses on committees that create policies and procedures hoping that they will be read and followed (Malloch, 2014). Making individuals come close to the system empowers them to be accountable and responsible for the outcomes. This needs to be something to consider before being ruled out for any organization. These characteristics are advocated for by transformation leadership styles (Malloch, 2014).

Even so, transformational/relationship theories advance that subordinates need to be motivated by leaders through taking care of them for better productivity (Russel, 2011). The theory focuses on leaders and subordinates connections. Leaders need to motivate subordinates by helping them understand the significance of their roles as well as the general organization goals. Usually, leaders in this classification are morally upright with high ethical standards as they strive to ensure organizational, group and individual success (Russel, 2011).

Implications of employing transformational leadership

Contemporary leadership theories have contributed critically towards the advancement of this theory (Komives & Dugan, 2010). In these theories, both relational and collaborative natures of leadership are emphasized. Leadership is increasingly becoming complex…