Organizational Leadership Styles and Approaches

Organizational Leadership
Part 1
It is important to note, from the onset, that organizational culture can be a rather difficult concept to comprehend for most. This is more so the case given that it has got to do with the interactions between individuals in an organizational setting and how these interactions and behaviors are governed by the prevailing beliefs, values, as well as shared assumptions. In an attempt to help in the evaluation as well as assessment of the relevant organizational culture elements, Edgan Schein came up with a model that we could utilize to assess organizational leadership effectiveness. According to Edgar, the culture’s visible elements are the artifacts. These include, but they are not limited to, the various workplace processes, art, dress codes, as well as structures. Individuals who are not necessarily part of the culture can be able to recognize artifacts (Elisabeth, 2010). Given that these are the visible organizational elements, it would be possible to assess organizational leadership effectiveness by, amongst other things, evaluating how well the organization allocates tasks and coordinates activities so as to achieve its aims. On the other hand, espoused values are inclusive of “the values of the organization such as annual goals, vision statements, and accepted norms” (Elisabeth, 2010, p. 208). In that regard, therefore, espoused values could in some instances be represented by the plans and strategies put in place to accomplish organizational goals. On this front, organizational leadership effectiveness could be assessed by determining whether the top leadership of the organization properly expresses and advances the various philosophies as well as strategies critical for organizational success. Lastly, basic underlying assumptions are inclusive or representative of “the underlying values in the organization which, while not expressly stated, set the guiding tone for how organizational members take action” (Elisabeth, 2010, p. 208). The said values may not be obvious to members of the culture. With that said, organizational leadership effectiveness at this level could be assessed via the evaluation of not only the efficiency level of employees, but also their morale.
The five disciplines of learning organizations, as formulated by Peter Senge, include “personal mastery, mental models, building shared vision, team learning and systems thinking” (Wilkinson, 2015, p. 117). It would be prudent to assess each discipline in an attempt to describe the leadership efforts that would come in handy in my organization so as to begin practicing the said disciplines. To begin with, when it comes to building a shared vision, the relevance of fostering interaction with organizational employees cannot be overstated. In that regard, therefore, to begin practicing this particular discipline, leaders in my organization must ensure that their personal visions are shared by way of transferring and referring them as would be appropriate. With regard to system’s thinking, there is need for leaders in my organization to embrace the fact that actions and consequences are correlated. Leaders must see the bigger picture instead of focusing on specific actions in isolation. Next, we have mental models. Employees, as Peter Senge points out, ought to be aware of what the company values are and also have good understanding of the operational aspect of the business (Wilkinson, 2015). Today, businesses operate in a truly dynamic environment. In that regard, therefore, organizational leaders ought to be ready to embrace change and make adaptations so as to fit into new models. When it comes to team learning, ‘thinking together’ is a concept that is of great relevance in attempting to promote shared knowledge as well as insights and experiences (Wilkinson, 2015). The organizational leadership ought to ensure that team members deem their colleagues as collaborators, as opposed to competitors or rivals. An environment should be created whereby continuous learning is promoted by viewing mistakes as learning opportunities. Lastly, we have personal mastery. In this case, deliberate strategies ought to be put in place so as to ensure that the gap between reality and vision is bridged. This could be achieved by promoting open sharing of information and promotion of the relevant competencies.
Part 2
It is important to note, from the onset, that different managers have distinct approaches to leadership. While some managers are largely hands-on, others tend to adopt the laissez faire approach and leave employees to figure out how to execute tasks. In essence, transactional leadership has got to do with the promotion of compliance to the objectives as well as goals of the organization via close supervision as well as through the utilization of a system of punishments and rewards. This is in contrast to transformational leadership where the focus is employee motivation in a way that unites organizational objectives with employee values and belief systems. In this latter case, leaders lead by example and employees tend to embrace the values as well as vision of the leader. This is in contrast to transactional leadership in which case the orientation of leaders tends to be on tasks as well as outcomes – effectively meaning that transactional leaders have to closely observe employees and how they are performing the various tasks assigned to them. Close supervision is of essence. Transformational leaders seek to further enhance the abilities as well as capabilities of employees by way of assessing and evaluating their strengths and weaknesses. It is important to note that no single style or approach to leadership is effective under all circumstances. This is to say that while transformational leadership could be effective in some quarters, it might not be as effective in others. According to Warren Bennis, one of the distinguishing factors of exemplary leaders of tomorrow will be how well such leaders identify with the softer side, i.e. in relation to character, judgment, as well as people skills. In that regard, therefore, Bennis’s viewpoints were more in line with transformational leadership. As a matter of fact, in reference to transactional leadership, Warren Bennis was of the opinion that “…the new leader… is one who commits people to action, who converts followers into leaders, and who may convert leaders into agents of change…” (Larson and LaFasto, 1989, p. 120). Towards this end, Bennis (and Burt Nanus) proposed several qualities of a transformational leader. In addition to having a vision of the future that is well defined and clear, Bennis was also of the opinion that transformational leaders ought to be their organizations’ social architects. This is to say that they ought to come up with a definitive direction for others to follow and communicate the same in an efficient manner. It is also important to note that Bennis in this case reiterated the relevance of creating clarity via the promotion of clarity and consistency. This is to say that the position of leaders ought to be clear and well defined. Lastly, a transformational leader, according to Bennis ought to be aware of his or her strengths so as to further enhance their strong points while taking deliberate measures to diminish their weak points. The viewpoints of Bennis on leadership deviate from the utilization of disciplinary power to direct action, and rewards to motivate performance – which are the all key hallmarks of transactional leadership.
An analysis of the leadership of many organization returns diverse leadership approaches. Apple Inc. remains one of the world’s most successful tech companies. The company’s success is largely attributable to Steve Job’s (its founder) contribution and leadership over the years. According to Addison (2016), Steve Jobs remains one of the best examples of a transformative leader in recent times. Some of the most critical elements of the kind of leadership skills Steve Jobs espoused include, but they are not limited to, involvement, innovation, passion, and focus (Addison, 2016). It is important to note that as a true transformational leader, Steve Jobs, as Addison (2016) further points out, was committed to the creation of a harmonious workplace that natured talent and encouraged teamwork. His approach to leadership sought to not only promote positive change, but also create valuable experiences for followers. As a matter of fact, it is important to note that as Steve Jobs once pointed out, “my passion has been to build a lasting company where people were motivated to make great products. Everything else was secondary” (Addison, 2016). This very statement is indicative of an individual keen to motivate people towards the accomplishment of organizational goals and objectives. Jobs seems to have been well aware of the fact that to create a really innovative company – a company that was ahead of the competition when it came to the development and creation of new products and featured – he had to piece together a team that was not only competent, but also motivated and creative. He had to ensure that the sense of self that employees possessed was linked to the organization’s values. While transactional leaders tend to function within the culture of the organization that is already in place, transformational leaders like Steve Jobs appear to be appreciative of new ideas and ready to adopt courses of actions that could end up transforming the culture of the organization.
Leadership ought to be about the willingness as well as ability to trigger positive transformation. Transformation in this case should seek to impact the lives of others meaningfully. There is no shortage of leaders who have brought about positive change. On the technology front, Steve Jobs is one such leader. This worldview could be compared with several elements of organizational leadership. One of the key elements of organizational leadership, according to Zaccaro and Klimoski (2002), has got to do with “processes and proximal outcomes (such as worker commitment) that contribute to the development and achievement of organizational purpose” (6). The organizational purpose should in this case be aligned with the overall goal of positive impact. Zaccaro and Klimoski (2002) are also of the opinion that the application of influences that are non-routine on organizational life is yet another key element of organizational leadership. Effort ought to be applied in seeking to be responsive to the needs of all stakeholders who include, but they are not limited to, employees, shareholders, suppliers, as well as creditors.



















References
Addison, J. (2016). Real Leadership: 9 Simple Practices for Leading and Living with Purpose. New York, NY: McGraw Hill Professional.
Elisabeth, P. (2010). Recruitment, Development, and Retention of Information Professionals: Trends in Human Resources and Knowledge Management. New York, NY: IGI Global
Larson, C.E. & LaFasto, F.M. (1989). Teamwork: What Must Go Right/What Can Go Wrong. Newbury Park: SAGE
Wilkinson, P. (2015). The Dependent Organization. New York, NY: Brown Dog
Zaccaro, S.J. & Klimoski, R.J. (2002). The Nature of Organizational Leadership: Understanding the Performance Imperatives Confronting Today's Leaders. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons