HRM Leadership Issues at LG Displays LG

HRM

Leadership Issues at LG Displays

LG Display appear to have some issues leadership issues, with the way managers are interacting with the employees, with employs having a lack of trust and faith in the managers. The managers appear to assume that they the power to act in an arbitrary fashion, which is perceived as being unfair and detached by the employees, using their power in more of a coercive manner, rather than being seen as legitimate power, as it is only those who drink and smoke with the managers that good the good annual assessments. Coercive power is seen where an individual has the ability to use their power to punish others, this along with the lack of respect which undermines the potential for referent power which benefits leaders when it is present (Northouse, 2009).

The employees feedback also indicate a lack of communication and detachment, managers appear to have little knowledge of their employees jobs and roles, and the work they do, sometimes not knowing what responsibilities existed and other times failing to acknowledge hard or good performance while blaming employee for bad performance. Overall, the management style is one that is based on an assumption that employees should do as they are told, and that the position of manager automatically comes with certain powers which do not include considerate for the human aspects of the job. This approach may be characterized as autocratic or command style of leadership; where managers expect to be obeyed without questions and are task rather then people focused (Buchanan and Huczynski, 2011; Northouse, 2009).

Recommendations

To rectify the situation a number of measures may be considered, these deal the processes and the leadership styles. There are a number of models which look at leadership and assess the way in which leadership is, or is not, effective. An effective model to use is that of Goleman (2000), who postulates there are six potential leadership styles, and that a leader will be able to adapt to meet the needs of different situations. The six styles are coercive, authoritative, affilitive, democratic, pacesetting and lastly a coaching style (Goleman, 2000). Their needs to be a culture change that will allow the managers to develop their skills and knowledge of leadership in order to provide the leadership style that is most needed at any point in time. The current command or autocratic style may be good in emergency situation, but it is not associated with motivation and trust in the long-term (Buchanan and Huczynski, 2011; Northouse, 2009). The ability to adopt more democratic and coaching styles would be beneficial. This is likely to include more training and development as well as changes in the leadership that has allowed the autocratic culture to emerge. However there are other measures which need to be considered in order to resolve many of the current issues.

The way annual reviews take place should be changed. The new system needs to be based on objective rather than subjective measuring, including assessment of the actual level of productivity. Under Adams (1965) equity theory, employees want to feel that they are treated in a fair and equitable manner, if they are not they will seek to redress that imbalance; with dissatisfaction occurring regardless of if the employees feel they are being in a better or worse fashion compared to their peers. Using objective measures should help to increase the perception of fairness. The need to collect objective measures will also increase the managers' understanding of the actual performance of the employees.

The annual review stricture should also change, allowing for employees to give feedback on their managers, as the way managers treat employees is a part of their performance. Providing employees with an appeal process they can use of they feel that they are being treated unfairly is also a necessary strategy.

The next recommendation is the adoption of a clear strategy of promotion on ability and performance; where promotion initially takes place within the firm, and employees can apply for positions, where they will be judged in their actual performance. This will also support motivation, and as it is seen to work will increase trust.