Theoretical Views on Leadership Applied

¶ … theoretical views on leadership applied to a practitioner context within an organisation.

Report of approximately 2000 words, detailing recommendation that show the theoretical views on leadership applied to a practitioner context within an organisation.

Given the current business and resource challenges in the world, not necessarily limited to the business world, but also to the political, economical or demographical factors, the need to properly direct, organize, coordinate and plan actions, as well as to motivate and direct people has become a very important necessity. Along with this increased need for leadership and for the capacity to properly decide on the right things to do, there appeared a consolidated and continuously developing background portfolio of theories and models that help provide the basis for the leadership science.

One of the first leadership theories that appeared and gained ground was trait theory. Based on the perception that all successful leaders shared a certain sets of common characteristics or traits, the theory also supported the idea that these characteristics that gave way to an effective leadership could also be empirically identified and proven. The problem with such a theory was that the distinct set of leadership traits is formed of a very rich and diversified number of characteristics. A successful leader is at the same time adaptable and energetic, persistent and tolerant, decisive and cooperative.

Despite this, most theoreticians agreed on a common denominator according to which the five basic characteristics of an effective leader were intelligence, self-confidence, determination, integrity and sociability. This theory has significant advantages, among others the fact that it can be applicable not only to all sectors and segments of the economic world, but also in the military or political sectors as well.

It is also a theory that sounds logical and makes sense, because, given the responsibilities of a leader and the decisions he needs to be able to make, as well as the resources he is administering, you would expect him indeed to share all these characteristics. However, there are also particular problems with such a theory, mostly the fact that its focus on the leader and his characteristics take away from the concentration on the leadership process itself.

If we follow the traits theory, then the psychodynamic approach to leadership helps explains how a leader actually develops, from his birth, by exposure to different external factors and stimuli that transform him into a successful leader, if these factors are correct. Based on the relationship that an individual had with the parents during his or her growing period, the theory will identify factors that affect the leader - follower relationship. Although it could be identified as too theoretical and not functional in practice, it seems that the knowledge of the leader's own experience helps improve his performance as a leader.

The cognitive resources theory and the leadership skills model are more extensive leadership theories based on the traits theory. In the case of the latter, the emphasis is placed on the skills of the leader rather than his or her traits, while the cognitive resources theory is more complex in explaining the leadership process as a combination of leadership traits, leadership behavior and leadership situation.

The transactional leadership model, on the other hand, places a greater emphasis on the relationship between a leader and the followers in an entity or an organization. The theory is more useful in explaining the style of leadership, as reported to the employees in an organization, and, from this perspective, is more practical than the other theoretical approaches previously presented. At the same time, this also seems to be a theory more adapted to the 21st century organization where the interaction between a leader and the followers tends to be greater.

The participative leadership model is a model based on the relationship between leader and follower and where the different types of leadership styles are categorized depending on the level of implication in the decision making process that the followers have. According to the level of delegation, we can refer to autocratic, consultation, joint or delegation decision making frameworks.

In fact, the concern and focus that the leader has for two essential elements in his organization, people and production or outcome, define several models, including, for example, the leadership grid. According to the leadership grid model, there are five major leadership styles: country club, team, middle of the road, impoverished and authority - compliance. These different leadership styles are formed by the interaction of the concern for people and the focus on production variables and by how a leader moves along these two axes.

A company such as Google, for example, would be a good example of a country club management style. Indeed, the concern at Google is to develop a proper working environment in which the employees can develop their creativity and imagination, which will eventually positively impact production as well. We cannot say that the focus for production is zero, but that this derives from the focus on people. This is probably the case for most software developing companies, where the focus is on creating a mutually shared culture that will then produce the right results.

An industry such as the automobile industry would probably have a lower concern for people and a higher concern for the eventual output. This is mostly because the organizations also tend to be bigger and the leadership styles generally go back several decades without much change, when this was the style of leadership that generally predominated.

On the other hand, the relationship or attitude with the followers and the human resources within the organization is not always enough, which is why some of the theories were completed with additional variables, such as the particular situation at hand. One of these is Fielder's contingency model, also referred to as LPC (least preferred worker) Contingency Model, according to which "leader's style is appropriate to the situation, as determined by three principal factor."

According to this theory, an effective leader will be able to combine into his leadership style not only the actual relations with the followers, but also the particularities of the task that the respective follower is performing and the position of power as a variable. This type of model promotes the idea of an adapted leadership style, one that is not always unitary, but tends to change in order to be able to include different situations and still be able to produce the appropriate decision making result. The pattern of the leader's behavior in different situations imposed by the followers is also examined in such models as the Hersey and Blanchard's Situational Leadership Model.

The social exchange theory is an interesting theory that explains the emergence of a leader from the group as a product of the social actions that occur within the group rather than through the distinct personality traits that this individual might have. Indeed, the social exchange theory supports the idea that the fact that the future leader has proven himself in front of a group promotes him as a leader by the group itself.

The software industry or industries that are team-based are good examples in this sense. In the software industry, the programming/developing teams are generally based on several developers, one or more testers and a project manager who ensures not only the coordination with the upper management of the organization, but also the internal coordination of the team. The project manager is quite often hired exactly from the members of the programming team, because he has proven himself as someone who can both defend the team with the upper management and have the technical resources to translate the requirements of the clients and upper management into technical specifications that everyone can understand.

If many of the leadership theories and models examine how the behavior of the follower influences the activity and behavior of the leader, others take the reverse approach by focusing on how the behavior of the leader impacts the follower. One of these theories is the path-goal theory of leadership, supporting the idea that the leader's style will affect the characteristics of the follower and his approach to the situation at hand.

The software industry presents some of the most interesting situations of both individual leaders and leadership processes. First of all, the software industry has some very interesting and unique characteristics. One of these is, for example, especially in the start-up industries, that the leaders also have a technical background. They have worked previously in the past in the software industry and this has helped them built the technical background that later on could be used to work with their followers. This is true from Larry Paige and Sergei Brin to Bill Gates, the most iconic leader in the software industry, going through Steve Jobs. Many of the leaders within these companies also have technical backgrounds: Marissa Meyer, for example, VP at Google in charge with products development has an engineering background.

The reason that many of the leaders in the software industry have a technical background also comes from the fact that they have to prove themselves to the employees before being promoted by the group as their leader. Bill Gates is perhaps a good example in this sense: Microsoft during the early 70s was but a mixture of their programmers, but they selected Bill Gates to coordinate and organize their efforts because they saw him as the best prepared among them. This is also what named him chief software architect at Microsoft (besides the fact that he owned the company at that point) and he retained the respective function even after he was no longer CEO.

There are other particularities of leadership in the software development industry as well.

Because the work activity is based on the existence of development teams that generally incorporate developers, testers and writers and which are led by a team leader or project manager, there is a distinctive importance attributed to the project manager or team leader. His or her job is many folded, which means that he probably needs to have all the traits identified with the trait theory.

He needs to be not only technical and intelligent, to understand specifications and clarify any additional misunderstandings that the developers might have, but he also needs to have the entire social and collaboration background that is required. Even if at a smaller scale, he is still a very important leader in the activity of the organization and, as previously mentioned, he also assured the connectivity with the upper management. Finally, one of the particularities of the software industry is also related to the fact that this industry tends to be a very collaborative one, with the developers generally exchanging ideas about their activities, about how things can be completed, about the new developments on the market and in programming theory etc.

II. In order to discuss the different proposals for developing leadership competences in the software development organization I have investigated and referred to previously, it is important to emphasize some of the particularities of leadership in the 21st century, on a wider scale, not necessary just in the software industry.

First of all, some of the characteristics that leaders will need are less likely to change in time. A leader will still have to be intelligent and sociable, to communicate with people and use different sources in the decision making process, to identify the appropriate ways by which the followers can be stimulated, etc. At the same time, the 21st century organization is probably going to emphasize more the social leader rather than the one where intelligence background matters most.

The explanation for this perhaps best resides in the characteristics of the labor market in the 21st century. This is much more volatile than in the past decades and people are much more likely to move around and change jobs with an easiness that was not characteristic in the past. You also have a greater competition on the labor market, which means that people are more willing to change jobs, to move around and find better condition and better pay.

With this also comes the fact that there is now a vast and diversified portfolio of needs that has to be taken into consideration in order to have a satisfied employee. Money is no longer the only motivational factor for an individual. More and more employees now look at additional motivational factors such as the working environment, the way the leader expresses himself in the working environment etc. This is why the leader is no longer revolving around similar motivational factors: he has to expand his horizon in order to include all these new different elements.

Following this introduction and still taking into consideration that usually very little of the theoretical background taught in a class will actually be used as a leader, it is still important, in my opinion, to have some leadership classes in the organization. However, these can be adapted to the needs of our organization. First of all, it does not have to be a college management/leadership course - it needs to present leader personalities, the way they acted and made decisions in certain situations etc.

Second, this can be an interactive class which would mean that there would be certain case studies based on different presented actions that can be solved within the team and that the participants in this seminar can practically exercise their leadership skills. Third, it would also be interesting to have speeches and presentations from other leaders in the software industry, people who have succeeded etc.

The seminar can also have a strong motivational, but also social goal. From a motivational perspective, this would be an opportunity for would-be leader to be selected in an inner circle of potential future leaders. On the other hand, from a social perspective, it will also be an excellent framework in which future leaders can interact with their followers or with other future leaders whom they will come across in the future. Such a seminar will help develop leaders at an individual, but also collective levels.

Part of this interactive approach to building leadership capacity and capabilities in the organization can also include discussion groups following assigned readings from some of the great business leaders (or not necessarily) of the past centuries. In this sense, the reading activity, that could sometimes be considered as boring and not very involving, can be doubled by an activity where interaction plays the best part, where new ideas can be investigated among the participants, etc.

The upper management (CEO, COO, chief software architect etc.) also plays an important role in leadership development. Top executives can provide a strategic perspective on things and, additionally, can also share their great expertise with the future leaders. This can also be important in selecting successors and grooming them for the new position.

The role of the manager/leader as coach is likely to become more and more important in terms of leadership building in all organizations in the future and our company will be no exception in this sense.

The fact that the executives can double their other responsibilities with this very important one will mean that building leadership capacities will be considered a strategic objective within the company and it will receive the appropriate attention.

The role of the upper management in the whole learning process is also to transform the executives from their positional and hierarchical superiority to teachers and participants in the entire process of building leadership capabilities. The organization will thus appear more and more as a learning organization, one where skills, including leadership skills, are nurtured and encouraged at all levels of the organization.

Case studies in the seminar mentioned are a way of transforming the theoretical approach into a practical one. On the other hand, this can be taken higher up and made even more practical by assigning, under the supervision of an existing leader, a certain short-term project to the future leader.

Following our example of the software company, the short-term project could be the coordination of the development of a certain small module for the application. With such an approach, the future leader can (1) gain the confidence that he will be able to complete similar real tasks in the future as well and (2) see how the theoretical background is actually applied in the real organization. These types of on-the-job experiences will ensure that the respective employee will be ready to take that responsibility at a certain date in the future. Empowerment is probably the key term that can describe this proposal and is gaining quite a lot of ground in leadership theory throughout the different business sectors.

Including future selected leaders in current day-to-day decision making process in our software development organization is also a proposal to build leadership capacity in the company. The management meets with the project managers and team leaders every day at 10 am in order to review any potential change in client specification and requirements and to discuss any potential problems that might delay the final release date. In order to get a closer feel of these discussions and be prepared to assume future project management duties, selected individual can participate at these meetings. Additionally, they can also be taken to client meetings and meetings with partners in order to build on their knowledge of the activity of the company and, additionally, be able to perform successfully as leaders when time comes.