Communication and Leadership Effective Communication

Communication and Leadership

Effective communication is the cornerstone of good leadership. Without effective communication, a leader cannot make his or her needs and wishes known to others. A lack of good communication from a leader can thus lead to a functional breakdown in many situations. A situational organizational climate is key to good communication for leaders, and there are many techniques that leaders can use to improve communication within their organization.

Kline argues that the initial step in creating good communication is establishing a functional working climate. The three basic climates are: the dehumanized climate, the overhumanized climate, and the situational climate. Both the dehumanized climate and the overhumanized climate can lead to problems in communication that cripple a leader's ability to effect change (Kline).

The dehumanized climate is perhaps the most familiar, and based on a master-slave relationship. Leaders (and subordinates) operate under assumptions that subordinates are much like children: they lack the ability to make their own decisions, like to be led, care little about the organization, and do not like responsibility. As a result of these assumptions, supervisors tend to communicate in many ineffective ways, including withholding information, micromanaging subordinates, managing upward and lateral communication themselves. Subordinates react to these communication styles by gossiping (since information is not shared), and learning little about the organization (since little is communicated) (Kline).

The overhumanized climate is, essentially, the opposite of the dehumanized climate. In the overhumanized climate, both leaders and subordinates are preoccupied with social relationships. In this climate, the basic assumptions are that human relationships are more important than objectives in an organization, that conflict must be avoided, that decisions should be shared, rather than given from the top, and that the motivation of subordinates must be intrinsic. These assumptions can often result in many serious problems with communication. The overemphasis on the needs of the individual can result in damage to the organization over time. In addition, since conflicts are avoided, they are often glossed over, and the underlying problems never addressed (Kline).

The situational climate avoids many of the communication problems associated with dehumanized and overhumanized climates. The situational climate is somewhere between the dehumanized climate and overhumanized climate. Overall, the leader in a situational climate communicates and understands that organizational and individual goals do not necessarily need to oppose the other. The situational leadership approach suggests that each situation needs a specific approach. The leader in a situational climate effectively communicates his or her desire to have a climate that is flexible enough to include the needs of individuals and the organization, and that can change depending on the situation (Kline).

A leader can improve communication in many ways. Encouraging feedback, listening effectively, communicating with key personnel, promoting group consensus, and reducing misunderstanding all play a key role in improving communication in a leadership position. These techniques foster a situational climate that is conducive to good leadership (Kline).

In conclusion, communication and leadership are closely linked. Without good communication, leadership is ineffective and can directly hamper the organization's goals.

Essay 2: Types and Styles of Leadership

Types and styles of leadership can play an important role in a leader's success or failure. The style of leadership that a leader employs is often a mixture of his or her own personal beliefs and characteristics combined with the needs of the organization.

There are three classic leadership styles: the laissez faire leadership style, the autocratic leadership style, and the participative leadership style. The laissez faire leadership style can be seen as non-interventionist style of leadership. The leader minimizes the direction that he or she gives to subordinates, and often leaves subordinates to make decisions. The laissez faire leadership style can be highly effective with a motivated and highly trained workforce (Legacee Management Systems Inc.). The laissez faire type of leadership has had many proponents, including Theodore Roosevelt, who once said, "The best executive is the one who has sense enough to pick good men to do what he wants done and self-restraint to keep from meddling with them while they do it."

The autocratic leadership style is essentially the opposite of the laissez faire leadership style. An autocratic leader tends to make demands, give little information to subordinates, and expect a relationship with subordinates similar to a master-slave relationship. Recently, many CEOs have been criticized for employing this form of leadership, and it is becoming less popular (Legacee Management Systems Inc.). Unfortunately, autocratic leadership often does not work because subordinates resent the leader's lack of participation. Robert Half said, "Delegating work works, provided the one delegating works, too."

The participative leadership style, which is somewhere between the autocratic and laissez faire styles, seeks to create a partnership between the leader and subordinates. In the participative leadership style, the leader does not order or demand subordinates, and is seen in organizations that require extensive innovation. The participative leadership style can be effective in enhancing teamwork, creativity, problem solving, improving quality, and improving customer service (Legacee Management Systems Inc.).

Interestingly, research has shown that no leadership style is universally the most effective. The situation and personalities of the subordinates and leader all play an important role in deciding what type of leadership style is the most effective (Legacee Management Systems Inc.).

Other leadership styles have been described that can work in specific situations and with specific individuals. These include the transformational leadership style, the strategic leadership style, and the team leadership style (Legacee Management Systems Inc.).

The transformational leadership style is often used effectively to make changes within individuals, groups, and organizations. This style of leadership is often dependent on the ability of a leader to be charismatic and visionary (Legacee Management Systems Inc.).

The strategic leadership style is often used by the military and large corporations. It focuses on competitiveness and the desire to win against the competition.

The team leadership style essentially removes supervisors and departments from the equation. Instead, workers became a team, often led by a team leader (Legacee Management Systems Inc.).

In conclusion, the type of leadership style that is the most effective depends largely on the situation, the needs of the subordinates, and the needs and abilities of the leader. Effective leadership only occurs when all of these factors are taken into consideration.

Essay 3: Power and Influence in Leadership

Power and influence are of primary importance in effective leadership. McDonald et al. (2005) note, "some scholars think that understanding power and the use of influence might be the most important concepts in all of leadership."

While the terms power and influence are often used interchangeably, they are, in fact, separate concepts. Power can be described as the ability to create change. In contract, influence is the degree of change that can be made to the behaviors, values, beliefs, and attitudes of an individual. Power is the potential for influence, in other words (McDonald et al., 2005).

One of the most effective ways for a leader to use power is to influence someone of a higher authority. This upward influence plays an important role in how effective many leaders can be. Interestingly, the effectiveness of a leader with his or her subordinates can be strongly influenced by the leader's ability to influence supervisors. Writes McDonald et al. (2005), "As the leader becomes more effective in influencing the superior, he/she will become more effective with subordinates. The reverse is equally true; as the leader gains influence with subordinates, influence will be enhanced with the superior."

Clark (2000) notes that power in leadership is getting others to want to achieve a goal. In contrast, power alone is largely coercive. Dwight Eisenhower said, "Leadership is the art of getting someone else to do something you want done because he wants to do it."