Leadership Development and Leadership

Leadership and Conflicts LADERSHIP AND CONFLICTS Teamwork has increasingly become a common aspect within the organizational setup. Organizations in varied sectors and industries are ever more reliant on teamwork in the achievement of their goals and objectives. Nonetheless, teamwork presents a breeding ground for conflict, in large part due to differences in background, views, beliefs, personalities, objectives, and priorities (Toegel & Barsoux, 2016). Indeed, if not properly handled, conflict within a team can considerably hamper team morale, motivation, collaboration and productivity.

This section highlights a team conflict scenario, and discusses approaches for dealing with team conflict, clearly pointing out the role of leadership in managing team conflict. One instance of team conflict I have experienced during my professional life relates to disrespect for team norms on the part of some team members. Every team often has rules that determine how members of the team behave and interact with one another during the course of teamwork (Pope, 2008).

These rules relate to aspects such as attendance of meetings, articulation of views during meetings or discussions, as well as responsibility for individual roles and responsibilities. At one point, there was a certain member who consistently defied the rules we had set as a team. Contrary to team norms, he frequently arrived late for meetings, chatted during meetings, talked rudely to other members, interrupted others while talking, missed team building activities, and had always to be pushed to fulfill his part of the job.

Even with warnings from the team leader, the member remained stubborn. His behavior was a great detriment to the team as we sometimes missed deadlines. Worse still, immense enmity grew between the uncooperative member and other members of the team. Important meetings and discussions turned out to be exchanges. Eventually, no one wanted him in the team anymore, compelling the team leader to escalate the matter to the management for disciplinary action.

For a team to work effectively, every member of the team must effectively accomplish the duties assigned to them. They must fulfill their obligations relating to not only their part of the job, but also the rules of the team. The fundamental idea behind teamwork is to bring together a group of individuals to combine their efforts so as to more effectively and swiftly accomplish a certain goal (Pope, 2008).

In other words, every member of the team is a collaborator, meaning that their individual input substantially influences the final outcome of the group. Without collaboration, the existence of a team would actually be meaningless. Accordingly, the team leader, together with the team, must ensure a spirit of collaboration is created and maintained. There are a number of ways through which collaboration within a team can be forged. One way is to learn from one another (Gratton & Erickson, 2007).

A team often brings together individuals with diverse skills, abilities, backgrounds, and perspectives. Such diversity is the essence of a team. Indeed, Belbin's team inventory model asserts that an effective team is one in which members play diverse roles -- a team should have team workers, specialists, implementers, shapers, coordinators, resource investigators, and so forth (Margerison, 2003). This way, different capabilities complement one another -- specialists learn from team workers, shapers learn from implementers, and so on.

Each individual's skills and abilities are taken advantage of to the benefit of the team. When there is a spirit of learning from one another, team members see each other not as rivals, but as collaborators or partners. Learning from one another means team members share resources and knowledge, and help one another to accomplish their individual roles and responsibilities (Gratton & Erickson, 2007). Though a team involves collaborative effort, individuals often have their part to play.

Each individual is like an element working alongside other elements to achieve the objective of the group. Nonetheless, collaboration tends to succeed when individuals help one another while still accomplishing their own duties. For example, when a team member is stuck with their task or is experiencing some difficulty, the other team members should be the first to offer assistance by lending them their knowledge, skills, expertise, resources, or any other form of help.

Another way through which collaboration within a team can be improved is by ensuring openness and inclusivity. This involves encouraging diverse ideas, giving every member a chance to contribute, valuing every member, allowing room for the expression of concerns, building friendships, and ensuring honest and transparent communication (Parker, 2009). Team collaboration can further be enhanced by rewarding and acknowledging collaborative behavior, encouraging socialization outside work, as well as incorporating team building activities that involve collaboration.

These efforts cultivate an atmosphere of collaboration, ultimately minimizing or avoiding negative conflict and enhancing team functioning and effectiveness. The conflict described in the above scenario is an example of a destructive conflict. Also, known as a negative conflict, a destructive conflict is a conflict that does not add value to the team -- it destroys the team (Toegel & Barsoux, 2016). It deteriorates interpersonal relationships within the team, kills enthusiasm towards the team, diminishes individual commitment to the team, and undermines collaboration and the flow of work.

This can eventually stifle creativity and hamper team productivity. In the above scenario, for instance, the negative conflict deteriorated interpersonal relationships and undermined collaboration. While conflict is often perceived as negative, it may sometimes be positive. Also, referred to as constructive conflict, positive conflict is conflict that is beneficial to the team -- it generates productive ideas (Parker, 2009). It is characterized by flexibility, open-mindedness, acknowledgement of diversity, positive disagreement, and the belief that every member of the team can win.

An ideal example of constructive conflict is when team members have different, equally creative ideas or approaches about how to go about a certain task. Rather than viewing one approach as superior to the others, the team evaluates the various ideas and settles on the most suitable, acceptable, and feasible idea. In other words, divergence in perspectives does not escalate into a feeling of dominance, power struggles, blame games, unhealthy exchanges, threats, or a tone of hostility.

Instead, team members reinforce relationships between one another for the benefit of the team. This not only minimizes negative conflict, but also fosters collaboration. Though every team member has a role to play in maintaining a climate of positive conflict, the biggest burden is on the leader. In any setting, the leader serves as the guide of the group. The leader provides direction and models the acceptable behavior for their followers (Pope, 2008). Accordingly, as differences are likely to be experienced often, part of the leader's work involves solving conflicts.

This work involves identifying conflict as soon as it occurs, demonstrating willingness to resolve the conflict, knowing the most appropriate approach to use based on the nature of the conflict at hand, and ensuring the conflict does not become negative. It is common for most leaders to evade tension when conflict occurs, often in an attempt to exhibit harmony. While this approach can work sometimes, it may often cause hostility between the parties in conflict to pile up.

With time, the hostility can break bonds between team members, eventually impeding team productivity. Therefore, a leader must never allow a negative conflict to go unresolved. The role of the leader in forging collaboration and resolving team conflict has important ethical connotations. The leader has a role to create an atmosphere of equality where every member is treated equally irrespective of their background, views, personality, and/or closeness to the team leader (Parker, 2009). It is not uncommon for prejudice and favoritism to thrive in a team.

An ideal example would be the team leader favoring some members in the assignment of tasks, enforcement of team rules, and evaluation of performance. In the above scenario, for instance, the team leader may have exhibited unfairness by failing to warn the uncooperative member and reporting his behavior to a higher authority. That would have heightened the conflict, consequently deteriorating relationships not only between the uncooperative member and other members of the team, but also between the team leader and the team.

Therefore, a team leader has an ethical responsibility to act in the best interest of the group as a whole. On the whole, the importance of teamwork in today's increasingly complex workplace cannot be overemphasized. For the most to be made out of team effort, however, an environment of collaboration and positive conflict must thrive. It is imperative for team members to work together as a team, always helping and learning from one another.

There should be the understanding that every member plays a unique role, which ultimately contributes to the achievement of the overall goal. More fundamentally, rather than creating tension and conflict, diversity should be seen as an opportunity for creativity. Allowing divergence in views and perspectives opens the group to numerous ideas, which can lead to more innovative ways of doing things. The leadership should play an integral role in the achievement of this outcome.

As the head of the team, the team leader must set a good example for the team by forging a spirit of collaboration, positivity, and win-win conflict resolution. When the leader sets a good example, their followers are likely to emulate their behavior. Question 2 The business environment is inherently complex. The complexity is even greater when business operations cross national frontiers. Multinational corporations (MNCs) grapple with greater competitive dynamics as well as political, legal, social, cultural, and technological uncertainties. Managing change in such an environment can be quite difficult.

This difficulty particularly emanates from cultural differences (Luthans & Doh, 2012). This section discusses three major challenges facing MNCs today and justifies the relevance of change management theory in addressing the challenges. Further, attention is paid to the importance of effective communication in managing the challenges and change in general. One challenge MNCs face relates to cultural differences. Culture theory demonstrates that considerable cultural differences exist between countries. Hofstede's cultural dimensions model, for instance, asserts that countries differ in how they view authority, interdependence, success, uncertainty, and time (Luthans & Doh, 2012).

For instance, while some countries value individualism, others place emphasis on collectivism. Equally, while some countries insist on power and authority, others believe in equality. Even though globalization and immigration have been on the rise over the years, Hoftede's cultural model has immense relevance today. MNCs tend to experience considerable cultural difficulties in foreign countries. For instance, an American MNC entering China will experience difficulties arising from the significant cultural differences between the two countries: while the U.S.

is an individualistic and a low power distance society, China is a collectivist and a high-power distance society. Due to cultural differences, MNCs often have to adjust their strategy, structures, activities, and processes in accordance to the local culture. This is another challenge MNCs face, with HRM processes being the most affected. Indeed, making HRM decisions in the multinational context requires careful consideration of the local culture as culture often influences how individuals are motivated, engaged, and empowered (Lucas, Lupton & Mathieson, 2006).

In a masculine society such as the U.S., for instance, individuals tend to be driven by achievement, success, and competition, meaning that employee compensation and rewards tend to reflect such values. On the contrary, a feminine society tends to emphasize consensus, solidarity, and compromise, meaning HRM processes would mirror such values.

In addition to employee compensation, MNCs have to make decisions relating to recruitment, often having to choose from ethnocentric staffing (bringing in staff from the domestic country) or polycentric staffing (recruiting staff from the host country), or a combination of both (Brewster, Sparrow & Vernon, 2011). Each approach presents its own merits and demerits, hence the need for careful selection of the most appropriate approach. Cultural differences manifest in not only people decisions, but also communication tendencies.

Indeed, communication is an important challenge that can hinder MNC success in the global environment. Culture dictates how people behave and communicate. This is ideally demonstrated in Hall's cultural model. The model argues that communication behavior tends to fall in two categories: low-context communication and high-context communication (Luthans & Doh, 2012). The former is characterized by explicit, direct, precise, and straight-to-the-point communication. In a low-context culture, a "Yes" often means agreement with an idea.

Further, it is common for people in such cultures to yell at others or communicate aggressively when angered. In a high-context society, on the other hand, communication tends to be implicit, indirect, and contextual. In such a culture, saying "Yes" may not necessarily mean agreement with an idea -- it may just be for the sake of maintaining harmony. These communication differences usually have important implications for MNCs as they can lead to misunderstandings, conflicts, and negotiation difficulties.

Due to the implications of cultural differences, it is increasingly becoming important for MNCs to equip their employees with cross-cultural competencies (Brewster, Sparrow & Vernon, 2011). Implementing cross-cultural training can be viewed as a moment of organizational change, meaning proper planning and implementation is crucial. Though there are numerous models offering guidelines for change implementation, the two most renowned ones are Kotter's eight-step model and Lewin's model. Compared to most change management models, these two models offer more straightforward guidelines for implementing organizational change.

Kotter's eight-step provides eight steps for change implementation: 1) create a sense of urgency; 2) build a guiding coalition; 3) create a vision for change; 4) articulate the vision; 5) eliminate obstacles to change; 6) create short-term wins; 7) build on the change; and 8) institutionalize the change (Hayes, 2014). The eight steps can be applied to virtually any type and scale of organizational change, including the implementation of cross-cultural training in MNCs. As per the model, a MNC would start by demonstrating to employees why it is important to have cross-culturally competent employees.

A team, most likely within the HRM function, would then be formed to oversee the entire process. The team would be involved in setting objectives for the program, identifying employees to enroll into the program, seeking employees' perspectives on the program, and deciding the most appropriate way of disseminating the education. Though Kotter's model is simple and straightforward, an organization may not in practice follow the steps as they appear. Compared to Kotter's model, Lewin's model provides much shorter steps for implementing change.

The model provides three steps: 1) unfreeze; 2) change; and 3) refreeze (Biech, 2007). The first stage involves preparing the organization for change and challenging the status quo. In the second stage, the actual change occurs -- uncertainty reduces and individuals start supporting the new initiative. At the refreeze stage, the change starts to take shape, eventually leading to its incorporation into the organization's culture. A closer look at Lewin's model reveals that it is somewhat a summary of Kotter's model.

An important strength of the two models is that they place emphasis on the elimination of barriers during change implementation. Change often raises anxiety, fear, and uncertainty on the part of those that will be directly affected by it, consequently resulting in resistance to change (Hayes, 2014). Employees, for instance, may be reluctant to participate in cross-cultural training due to unwillingness to relocate to a foreign country. Resistance to the initiative may further stem from perceived insignificance of the program in an increasingly globalized and culturally convergent society.

Without addressing the associated concerns and fears, implementing the change initiative and achieving the desired outcomes can be quite difficult. Effective communication presents an important solution for resistance to change. Indeed, most change initiatives fail often due to ineffective communication. Effective communication is important for familiarizing employees with the need for change, giving them an opportunity to air their views and concerns, and keeping them committed to the change initiative. So what exactly does effective communication entail? It entails communicating the change initiative regularly, consistently, and via numerous channels (Hayes, 2014).

A single presentation or speech by the CEO or leader at the beginning of the change process is often not enough. The leadership should instead take advantage of every opportunity available to communicate the change -- from meetings and memos to intranets, focus groups, bulletin boards, training initiatives, team building activities, interactive forums, and so on. Frequent and consistent communication demonstrates the leadership's commitment to the change.

Effective communication also encompasses conveying information as soon as it is available (keeping key stakeholders up-to-date), providing opportunities for staff members to ask questions and offer their input, clarifying concerns, as well as communicating the vision for the change as clearly and precisely as possible (Hayes, 2014). Rewarding and recognizing positive behavior towards the change is also important during change. By using these strategies, MNCs can successfully overcome the challenges they face. The above approach to communication embodies bottom-up communication.

Indeed, the importance of bottom-up communication in change management cannot be overemphasized. It basically entails fostering participative or inclusive decision making (Biech, 2007). Members of staff may often have creative ideas about the change initiative. In a top-down setting, these ideas may be missed as employees usually have little or no say in decision making -- they are expected to follow instructions without questions. On the contrary, bottom-up communication ensures members of staff take part throughout the entire change management process.

Employees get a chance to seek clarifications and contribute their perspectives about the change process. In addition to encouraging creativity, bottom-up communication is usually a great way of motivating and empowering employees (Hayes, 2014). Employees feel appreciated and get a sense that the leadership cares about their concerns and views, and thereby become more committed to the change initiative. Nonetheless, as numerous perspectives have to be taken into account, decision making may sometimes be slowed down. This may be dangerous when quick decision making is required.

Moreover, differences in perspectives may escalate into interpersonal conflicts, consequently hindering the change process. Overall, MNCs face difficulties due to cultural differences between countries. These differences often mean differences in business communication and organizational behavior in general. Therefore, to succeed in the global business environment, MNCs must consider the characteristics of local cultures. Cultural differences can present difficulties during change implementation as there may be miscommunication. This underscores the importance of effective communication during the change process. More specifically, participatory decision making should be forged.

This can be a valuable way of minimizing resistance to change. Question 3 In an increasingly complex world, performance management at the organizational level is important. Organizations must constantly have individuals with the right skills, knowledge, and capabilities if they are to achieve their goals and objectives in the present and in the future (Rothwell, 2010). This underscores the significance of leadership development and succession planning.

As the present leaders will retire or exit from the organization at some point in the future, an organization must ensure there are individuals to effectively replace the leaders when they retire or exit. This is what leadership development is all about. In addition to discussing the importance of leadership development and succession planning, this section identifies three succession planning challenges for organizations in the next 10 to 15 years, clearly highlighting recommendations for addressing the challenges. In the next one decade or so, a significant number of leaders will retire.

This is particularly true because most of the seasoned leaders in organizations today belong to earlier generations, especially baby boomers and Generation X's (Rothwell, 2010). Most of these leaders have held their positions for years or decades and will be retiring soon. While some will be retiring, others may exit the organization due to other reasons such as attrition, the search for greener pastures, and even illness, disability, and death.

When this happens, organizations that did not invest in leadership development and succession planning are likely to be left with a leadership vacuum. The organizations will have younger employees with little or no leadership experience to navigate their organizations through the ever more complex world, which can have disastrous consequences on the organization. This highlights the need for leadership development. Organizations must constantly prepare their employees for tougher and more involving responsibilities in the future.

The importance of leadership development and succession planning can also be viewed from a cost perspective. Recruiting new leaders can be a costly undertaking for an organization, particularly when the vacancies are to be filled within a short period of time. Indeed, the cost of retaining employees tends to be lower in the long run than the cost of recruiting new ones (Truss, Mankin & Kelliher, 2012). When an organization has leadership development initiatives in place, however, such huge costs may not be incurred as vacancies are filled internally.

Employees that have been undergoing mentorship, coaching, and training are picked to replace the exits, eliminating the need for external recruitment. Other justifications for leadership development and succession planning include the need to prevent the loss of organizational memory, increased shortage of outstanding leadership talent, and diminished employee loyalty (Rothwell, 2010). While leadership development and succession planning is important, it is increasingly becoming a challenging endeavor. The challenge is expected to be even greater in the next 10 to 15 years.

One challenge organizations will face in the near future relates to generational differences at the workplace. This is a particularly important challenge given the increased retirement of baby boomers and greater entry of younger generations into the workforce (Rothwell, 2010). Generational cohort theory indicates that different generations tend to have different behaviors, attitudes, perceptions, values, worldviews, and expectations (Costanza et al., 2012).

For instance, while baby boomers are generally characterized by a strong work ethic and robust commitment to the organization, millenials tend to value work-life balance, greater autonomy, and a fun work environment. These differences are increasingly influencing human resource practice, particularly in relation to leadership development and succession planning. Previously used tactics may be ineffective or irrelevant in the future as younger generations have different expectations about the employer-employee relationship.

How can organizations deal with the challenge presented by generational diversity at the workplace? One approach is to adjust the psychological contract. The psychological contract basically denotes the invisible relationship between the employer and employees, often embodied by the expectations each entity have for the other (Maia & Bastos, 2015). For instance, while employees expect aspects such as job security and good remuneration from the employer, employers expect aspects such as loyalty and job commitment from employees.

In the age of increased generational diversity, things like loyalty and job security may not be appealing to employees as they are increasingly disfavoring long-term contracts -- they desire shorter contracts. This means organizations must structure their leadership and succession planning efforts oblivious of these changes. Addressing the challenge of generational diversity also requires finding new ways of motivating and empowering employees, such as increased.