Leadership Innovation The Role of Leadership Styles in Organizational Innovation and Success

Purpose Statement / Problem Statement

Theory

Effects of theory

Limitations of the theory

Innovation and Organizational Success

Leadership Style and Innovation

Leadership Styles and Organizational Success

Instruments for assessing leadership style

Vl. Methodology

Vll. Type of Study

Quantitative Research

Qualitative Research

Vlll. Conclusion

This study will attempt to identify which leadership style is best suited for organizational innovation and success. There are a large range of factors to be considered. Among them, leadership style has been recognized as one of the most important of the various considerations. Leadership style correlates to positive transformation as well as influences organizational innovation and often diffusion of innovation. A few studies have empirically examined and found the links between leadership style and innovation at the organizational level and even connection between style of diffusion of innovation and success. Leadership style has been traditionally emphasized as the most important individual influences on organizational innovation (Goldsmith, Baldoni and McArthur, 2010).

Within the development of the literature, researchers and professionals have started believing that the collective capability of organizational learning plays a key role in determining innovation which passively affects the real form of success. In the structural equation model organizational learning creating a stronger direct influence on innovation than leadership style but however, leadership had a strong, significant influence on organizational learning, indirectly affecting firm innovation and success. Influential leadership always motivates the inverted pyramid style managerial structure of employees as a part of organization. Functional key of success is depending on exceptional innovation and diffusion. This is basically an extended effort of the top level leadership in a model of managing strategic contradictions associated with paradoxical cognition. Top leaders are articulating a paradoxical frame, differentiating between the strategy and feature for the existing product and those for innovation, moreover integrating between those strategies and features while diffusion of any new innovation. Still there is a big lack of research which specifically examines the contextual conditions under which this factor enhances the organizational success (Lindebaum and Cartwright, 2010).

II. Purpose Statement / Problem Statement:

a. The purpose of this study is to explore and provide a deeper understanding of the relationship between leadership styles and organizational innovation. This research will also provide all the details of connectivity factors and catalysts of ultimate organizational success, which will enhance the basic idea of relation between leadership style and success. These factors vise aversely spread effect on total management strategy.

b. It is not fully known to what extent leadership styles keep impact on innovation and diffusion which ultimately is a critical success factor of innovation enhancement and organizational success. Therefore, this study will investigate to provide a deeper understanding of the relationship between leadership styles and organizational innovation and success. During the course of investigation it will go through different phases and experiments even it may change or update few previous concepts.

III. Literature Review:

Theory:

Transformational Leadership Theory: This research is intended to investigate the impact of transformational leadership on organizational innovation, and to determine whether transformational leadership acts as a positive catalyst in organizational success. Bass discussed in his theory of Transformational Leadership about both organizational environment and personality factors. Charismatic leaders basically are more successful to motivate others employees and even the higher managements. Bass (1985) in his theory deals with such consideration that the association between transformational relationship and organic system brings changes rapidly. In the early pre-theory period there were a number of hypothesis that didn't fit the other theories, even often fit the involving attempts to make factor analysis fits with constructs that they stubbornly refused to accommodate (Hawkins, 2011). As the rapid technological changes are continuously taking place in today's dynamic work environment, transformational leadership leading change of high value in the organization. According to Goldsmith, Baldoni and McArthur, (2010) power needs to be predominated in transformational leaders and affiliation needed in transactional part. This theory has a big implication on the training of an employee. It is done by helping the staff, making them self-confident, making them aware of their further goals. From previous all the works it has been proved that good leaders are not only transformational but also transactional. There are hierarchies of correlations among the various leadership styles. In this theory there are multiple levels of analysis and psudotransformation (Goldsmith, Baldoni and McArthur, 2010).

Effects Of theory

This theory shows a continuous progress of leadership...

Progress of the management always carries employees and subordinate along with. According to (Rumsey, 2013) this means a full continuous process of progress at the root of an organization. This progress denotes the market position of an organization and competitive position of an organization
Vision: Charismatic leaders have natural inclination to be dissatisfied with status-quo and always search for a radically different vision. Learn more about vision in -- leadership purpose (Rumsey, 2013).

Strong leadership traits: Charismatic leader develop all the necessary traits of leadership, ability to inspire, establish credibility and are very strong in their communication skills.

Strong Self-Belief: Charismatic leader have strong inner conviction about their vision and strategies. They have gone through the phases of inner turmoil and have successfully overcome their inner conflicts to realize their full potential. The completion of self-discovery results in exceptional confidence, an attribute that only makes them more compelling and dominant.

Activist Mindset: Their inner conviction and desperation for change makes them self-promoting for their cause and belief. They are willing to pursue risky endeavors, their courageousness is a great influence on the followers, and people expect and admire leaders who are courageous (Goldsmith, Baldoni and McArthur, 2010).

Exemplary: Charismatic leaders practice high moral values, they are very ethical in their actions and follow a code of conduct at the expense of self.

Limitations of the theory:

This theory starts with leadership and often leadership doesn't bother to acknowledge themselves. They have a common believe that it is sufficient to be in good position in market if the production and marketing department is doing well. As a part of inverted pyramid style theory the flow of up gradation and transformation is downwards. So it is very difficult to go through proper process. The search for situational moderator variables may be more successful if directed at specific types of transformational behavior. Even if there is always some type of transformational behavior that is relevant for effective leadership, not every type of transformational behavior will be relevant in every situation. There is a small possibility that transformational leadership can have negative outcomes for followers or the organization. The transformational leadership theories reflect the implicit assumptions associated with the "heroic leadership." Charismatic leadership theories are usually conceptualized at the dyadic level, and group processes do not receive enough attention. Group processes are important not only because they are necessary to explain how a leader can influence the performance of an interacting group, but also because attributions of charisma are unlikely to be the same for all group members (Lindebaum and Cartwright, 2010).

According to Chrostie, Barling and Turner, (2011) the transformational leadership is broadly researched Transformational leadership has been widely researched, including a large body of qualitative research centering on prominent leaders and CEOs in major firms (CHRISTIE, BARLING and TURNER, 2011). It is also a subject that people are attracted to as it makes sense to them. The leadership style, according to researchers is process focused. Transformational leadership treats leadership as a process occurring between followers and leaders. Such leaders have an expansive leadership view. Transformational leadership provides a broader view of leadership that augments other leadership models. Such a leader is also a leader of people and emphasizes on the needs, values, and morals. Researchers like Orridge, (2009) say that transformational leaders and the leadership style observed is very effective. Evidence supports that transformational leadership is an effective form of leadership and induces change.

However research also points out to the fact that transformational leadership style also has several inherent weaknesses. For example Goldsmith, Baldoni and McArthur (2010) claim that the leadership style is too complicated: Transformational leadership is an amalgamation of various leadership theories, making it unreasonable to be trained or taught. This style of leadership also has the potential to be abused and misused (Goldsmith, Baldoni and McArthur, 2010). Transformational leadership's high effectiveness and the leader's vision makes it undemocratic; the leader's purpose is largely unchallenged, thus liable to be misused by the leader. There is plenty of historical evidence supporting its misuse, Adolf Hitler being one of the most prominent one. The dimensions of this style is also are not clearly delimited and the parameters of transformational leadership overlap with similar conceptualizations of leadership. The success and the measurement of the leadership has questionable measurement abilities. Also some transformational factors are not unique solely to the transformational model Transformational leadership treats leadership more as a personality trait or predisposition than a behavior that can be taught and such leadership style suffers from heroic leadership bias (Stippler, 2011).

Innovation and Organizational Success

Innovation can be considered as the initiation, adoption and implementation of new ideas or activity in an organization. It is recreation of a premade brand or making a…