Steve Jobs and Tim Cook's contrasting leadership styles at Apple

Managing to Keep Apple Fresh

All leaders, since perhaps Moses (of the bible) have approached leadership from a unique perspective. This is to say that no leader exhibits exactly the same leadership traits as another leader. In an attempt to determine the best approach to leadership, if there exists any, it would be prudent to take into consideration a company that has been led by two leaders with different approaches to leadership. Apple is the company of choice for this discussion.

Issue Identification

Within the last two decades, Apple has been lead by three different Chief Executive Officers. This discussion will concern itself with Steve Jobs and Tim Cook, the former and current C.E.O. Of the technology company. An overview of their leadership styles is of great significance as it could contribute towards the further understanding of organizational behavior and leadership.

It is important to note that leadership should not only be focused on the needs of the individual in the position of leadership. Rather, it should seek to address not only the needs of the relevant stakeholders but also those of the organization. In that regard, I submit that there is no single best way to lead -- a statement that has somewhat become a cliche due to its widespread usage. Some environmental variables demand the application of a unique style of leadership. Within the last two decades, Apple has gone through two phases that required a different approach to leadership. During these two phases, the company has been lucky to have individuals of the right caliber at the helm. It is perhaps for this reason that Schermerhorn (2012, p. 28) categorizes Apple as one of those "companies that exude management magic."

Critical Discussion

Contingency theory, one of the most prominent leadership theories, "posits that certain styles are effective in certain situations" (Northouse, 2010, p.113). Regarded by many a transformational leader, Steve Jobs led Apple at a time when it was in great need of what I will call a 'revolution.' Transformational leaders according to Bruce and Russell (2004) are regarded champions of change in the organizations in which they serve. To compete effectively, Apple had to embrace dramatic change especially when it came to enhanced innovation. In that regard therefore, the company needed an individual who would clearly (and perhaps cleverly) articulate its vision. Apple needed an individual who had the ability to boost the morale of employees while at the same time inspiring them to do their best. The company needed a transformational leader and Steve Jobs came in handy. Transformational leaders as Bruce and Russell (2004) observe are known to "alter the existing structure and influence people to buy into a new vision and new possibilities." Throughout his reign at Apple, Jobs was known to encourage not only the continuous development of products but also innovation. It is on the basis of Jobs' leadership that Apple ended up being a market leader in the Electronic Products marketplace. As Schermerhorn (2012, p. 29) observes, Apple's products are not only inspiring but also exciting.

After the demise of Steve Jobs, Tim Cook took over as the head of Apple. It should be noted that unlike Steve Jobs, Cook has exhibited a totally different approach to leadership. A review of his performance in the recent past clearly indicates that Cook is a transactional leader. Transactional management according to Blanchard and Johnson (as cited in Barbuto, 2005) has got to do with "creating strong expectations with employees, along with clear indications of what they will get in return for meeting these expectations." After more than a decade of rapid expansion, there was need for Apple to slow down -- the company is arguably in its maturity stage of development.