Autocratic and Transformation leadership

The transformational and autocratic leadership approaches as a novel quality standard impact organizational process and role development. An organizational leader is required to apply the leadership process to make sure long-run corporate targets are achieved, particularly in the current competitive, unstable business climate. Normative principles and policies, methodical management and strict discipline mark Mr. Nolan's leadership. Follower obedience is grounded in both set agreements and realistic regulations and standards. Followers are restricted by the limits and duties fixed for them. Hierarchical systems pre-establish and rank worker compensation. They explicitly delineate coercive procedures and apply them under particular predetermined conditions. Meanwhile, Mr. Keating espouses devotion, valor and insight. Based on their individual faith in him and his aims, his followers enthusiastically accept his vision, mission and personality. They regard him as a prophet, a futurist, or a gallant warrior (Nikezic, Puric, & Puric, 2012).

The transactional style of leadership addresses fundamental directive, organizational, short-run planning and administrative functions. This approach is founded on the premise that the workforce of an organization will be driven to work by a quality system penalties and rewards for individual behaviors. Such leaders concentrate on principles, rules and guidelines. Their focus is rather limited and fail to promote inventiveness and novel ideas. This approach is most ideal in tackling straightforward, well-defined corporate issues (Nikezic, Puric, & Puric, 2012).

A transformational leader accomplishes superior personnel performance by creating workforce awareness and approval of corporate missions and objectives and catering to the workforce's interests. This in turn causes personnel to begin giving importance to group (i.e., organizational) interests over personal interests. Transformational leaders will only be able to attain the aforementioned outcomes if they display charisma and motivate their followers, or if they are able to effectively fulfill subordinates' intellectual and psychological needs (Nikezic, Puric, & Puric, 2012).

Mr. Lumberg employs the power (influence) leadership model and, in specific, the coercive power approach. He exerts this when demanding that Peter work even during the weekend.

An individual's capability of influencing the behavior of other individuals by means of a perceived threat to punish or via actual punishment is termed as coercive power. Workers, for instance, might follow their superior's command owing to an actual threat or an innate dread of being punished. The common punishments meted out in companies include disagreeable work assignments, rebukes, suppression of important information, suspension, relegation to a lower post, or firing. Owing to the adverse effects of coercive power (e.g., development of feelings of hostility towards the individual exerting such authority), this leadership approach ought to be employed cautiously. Coercive control availability is different for different leaders and companies. A majority of contemporary companies have instituted explicit personnel treatment policies. Explicitly outlined guidelines and processes regulating coercive power exertion will curb managers' utilization of their legal formal authority subjectively and wrongly (Lunenburg, 2012).

The team coach in the 'Remember the Titans' video clip is shown describing the historic 1863 battle of Gettysburg before his team members in order to make them attain what he desires them to. This is a fine example of transformational leadership. Such leaders motivate their subordinates to give their best to accomplish their company's long-term vision. They effectively shape the basic beliefs and outlooks of their team, cultivating within them a shared mind-set to accomplish organizational objectives. This approach to leadership often produces more superior performance as compared to transactional leadership. Transformational leaders ought to handle firms understanding them as a knowledge-based system wherein external knowledge (absorptive capacity), fundamental implicit and overt knowledge, or extant knowledge (slack and utilized) is disseminated. Such dissemination generates an information movement which, via numerous transformational procedures (organizational learning), yields novel new knowledge that produces key organizational competences when utilized (innovation) (Garcia-Morales, Llorens-Motens, & Verdu-Jover, 2007).

Team leaders have a pivotal part to play in the determination of team performance. A PMI (Project Management Institute)-commissioned study revealed that project managers' leadership approach constitutes a major team performance success aspect. Transformational leaders influence team performance via trust and value congruence. Performance represents the distal result variable of faith in one's leader. Under a transformational leader, team members' cognitive confidence and joint efficiency might develop in the phase of team development, functioning as two process variables which account for distal team performance (Chou, Lin, & Chang, 2013).

The approach to leadership apparent in the given clip from "The Princess Bride" was the contingency model proposed by Fiedler. This theory claims that leadership efficacy is contingent on the circumstance. The theorist posits that group climate ought to be evaluated independently of its leader. Theories classified under this group are founded on the supposition that approaches to leading subordinates are quite inflexible. Hence, it is not likely, (or at least, is extremely hard) for task-focused or dictatorial managers to alter their approach and adopt a more personnel-focused or participative strategy. Thus, this category indicates that to ensure school principal success, Ministry of Education authorities tasked with deploying and redeploying school heads must be capable of identifying individual school settings and choosing leaders who have the right approach for handling those settings (Peretomode, 2012).

The theorist maintains that the facets of a situation if integrated allow one to classify situations into the following three categories:

i. Highly Favorable Context: If every critical component is high.

ii. Intermediately Favorable Context: In such settings, a few situational traits are weak or low while the rest are high or good.

iii. Unfavorable Context: This represents a condition wherein every situational element is deemed to be weak or low.

The theorist identified the following two kinds of leadership approaches: relationship-focused and work-focused. In his view, both approaches are rather rigid and neither approach may be deemed as being suited for all contexts. But he asserts that both approaches, if applied in the right context, can prove successful. Thus, the ideal means to attain results is by matching leaders to particular contexts (or training them to alter the context in order to fit their respective approaches to leadership) (Peretomode, 2012).

A directive leader is one who clarifies before followers what he/she requires them to do, offers explicit guidance regarding how and what ought to be achieved, clarifies his/her role in the team, schedules team tasks, requests the team to abide by set regulations and rules, and upholds fixed performance standards. The measure termed as 'Locus of Control' reflects how far individuals perceive the atmosphere as being systematically reactive to their behavior. Individuals who hold the belief that whatever happens in their life is a result of chance or luck are termed as externals while those who hold the conviction that their behavior governs whatever takes place in their lives are termed as internals. Mitchell's study reveals that the former category is more pleased with directive leaders while the latter prefer participative leaders (House, 1975).

A supportive leader exhibits amicability, friendliness and concern for followers' requirements, welfare, and status. He/she does small but meaningful things that ensure a pleasant workplace atmosphere and treats team members as his/her equals. The theory posits that supportive leaders display most favorable effects on follower satisfaction in organizational settings where work is taxing, vexing or disagreeable. In spite of a certain amount of inconsistency in supportive leadership related studies, satisfactorily positive proofs exist to indicate that a manager ought to be responsive to the crucial requirement of a supportive approach when tasks assigned to followers are taxing, disagreeable or vexing (House, 1975).

The scenario in the given clip from "Devil Wears Prada" corresponds to the Trait leadership model in which candidates' personality and nature are scrutinized when assessing candidacy.

The preliminary survey by Stogdill revealed a collection of key leadership qualities linked to how people in different teams grow into leaders. Study outcomes reveal that average leaders differ from average subordinates in the eight qualities listed below: acumen, vigilance, understanding, accountability, creativity, tenacity, poise, and amiability (Leadership - Trait Approach, 2013). Leaders aiming for a trait approach to leadership need to possess:

1. Intelligence, or the intellectual capacity associated positively with leadership as corroborated by investigations of a succession of fresh researches into multiple leadership indicators including intelligence.

2. Self-confidence, or the capability of being sure of one's skills and abilities. This encompasses poise and self-worth, besides the conviction that one is capable of making a difference in one's organization. Leadership entails influencing other people; the trait of self-confidence assures leaders that their effort at influencing followers are right and apt.

3. Resolve, or a desire to complete tasks. It encompasses attributes like creativity, perseverance, control, and ambition. Determined individuals display proactivity, perseverance when faced with hurdles, and the readiness to stand up for themselves. They occasionally exhibit dominance, in scenarios where subordinates require direction.

4. Integrity, or the attribute of uprightness and dependability. Self-accountable individuals following a robust collection of principles display integrity. Leaders who display this trait stir confidence among followers as they prove that their actions correspond to their words. They are reliable, steady, and devoted. Essentially, integrity imparts credibility to an individual and makes him/her worthy of trust

5. Amiability, or a leader's tendency to look for satisfying social relationships. Such leaders are approachable, gregarious, polite, sensitive, and subtle. They display sensitivity to followers' welfare and needs. Social leaders possess sound interpersonal abilities and forge cooperative bonds with subordinates.

References

Chou, H.-W., Lin, Y.-H., & Chang, H.-H. (2013). Transformational Leadership and Team Performance. SAGE Journals.

Garcia-Morales, V., Llorens-Motens, F., & Verdu-Jover, A. (2007). The Effects of Transformational Leadership on Organizational Performance through Knowledge and Innovation. British Journal of Management.

House, R. (1975). PATH-GOAL THEORY OF LEADERSHIP. Office of Naval Research.

(2013). Leadership - Trait Approach. SAGE publications.

Lunenburg, F. C. (2012). Power and Leadership: An Influence Process. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT, BUSINESS, AND ADMINISTRATION.

Michaelsen, L. (1973). Leader Orientation, Leader Behavior, Group Effectiveness and Situational Favorability: An Empirical Extension of the Contingency Model. Organizational Behaviour and Human Performance, 226 - 245.

Nikezic, S., Puric, S., & Puric, J. (2012). TRANSACTIONAL AND TRANSFORMATIONAL LEADERSHIP: DEVELOPMENT THROUGH CHANGES. International Journal for Quality research, 285 - 296.

Peretomode, O. (2012). Situational and Contingency Theories of Leadership: Are They the same? IOSR Journal of Business and Management (IOSR-JBM), 13 - 17.