Leadership style evolution in General Motors' ignition switch crisis

¶ … GM Culture Crisis and Organizational Culture

Leadership Theory

Leadership Style

The type of leadership type demonstrated in the case study is the Laissez-faire. With this style, the leader allows his or her team members the freedom to do their work in the way they deem appropriate (Gall, 2011). The team members determine the process and methodology of carrying out their duties and set their deadlines. The leader only provides support and necessary resources to the team. In the case study, the top management at GM was not aware of the problem of the ignition switch because the management was out of touch with the actual process on the shop floor of the company. This demonstrates that the management had given the team freedom to carry out their duties without interference from the leaders. Throughout the case study, the leadership style at General Motors has evolved. The leadership has changed from Laissez-faire to autocratic leadership style and finally to a democratic leadership style (Gall, 2011). The loopholes identified in the original leadership style occasioned the shift in leadership styles in the case study. The initial style provided too much freedom that ultimately led to complacency.

Internal and External Influences on Change of Leadership Style

The external influences on the change of leadership style include the customers. The death of 13 people that lead to the investigation was the beginning of the leadership style transformation within the company. The effect of the incident on the customers was the beginning of a shift in leadership that would be effective in the management of the company. The internal influences for leadership change were the employees. A culture of reluctance in taking responsibility and accountability of the employees was a driving force behind the change in leadership style.

Leadership Style and Organizational Decision Making

The leadership style had a great bearing on the organization decision-making framework. As already highlighted, the leadership of the organization left the junior employees to make their role in the running of the business. This leadership style led to a scenario where junior employees are left to make decisions that affect the operations of the business. Similarly, high-level management decisions were out of touch with the reality of the operations of the business.

Organizational Culture

Internal Culture

Internal culture included all the shared beliefs, assumptions and values that dictate how people behave in within the organization (Xenikou & Furnham, 2013). As such, organizational behavior is a result of the organizational culture. One significant internal organizational behavior is the reluctance in raising pertinent issues that affect the operations of the business. The organizational behavior could be because of an organizational culture that does not support interaction between junior staff and the company management. Secondly, the company has a culture that emphasizes on the outcome rather than the process. The organizational culture fosters the behavior of shortcuts within the organization.

Examples of Internal Culture

The main example of internal culture is one of reluctance in information sharing. For instance, the employees were aware of the ignition problem but could not share that information with the top management. Secondly, the internal culture is such that there is no sense of urgency. Although the engineers identified the issue they did not take proactive and urgent measures to deal with the issue. They demonstrate the internal organizational culture in the organization.

Insights and Conclusions

Leadership Style and Internal Culture

The leader style of the organization and its internal culture complement each other. The leadership style is the basis over which the culture thrives. For instance, the leadership style lacks a clear accountability structure, and this brings about general reluctance and absence of the sense of urgency.

The change in leadership style had a definite influence on the internal culture because the change introduced stringent accountability measure. Consequently, everyone had to take accountability for his or her actions or absence thereof. This caused a sense of urgency and a clear structure of information sharing. The leadership style and the organizational culture had a great influence on the behavior of employees that ultimately led to the problem in the case study. As mentioned, the leadership style fostered an organizational culture of reluctance. This culture influenced the employees not to take action although they were aware of the problem.