Leading in Modern Organisations - Essay Example

?Leading in Modern Organisations Introduction Several new issues and arguments are surfacing in leadership theory and practice. These wrestle with several important subject matters, such as the form of leadership styles currently demanded by organisations and, in contrast, those which are thought deserving of restraint; the distribution of leadership duties in an organisation; and the form of leadership development strategies which are believed to be crucial in modern organisations (Bennis 2007). For the most part, these contemporary issues in leadership reveal major alterations in the environment or setting wherein organisations are operating; some examples of these changes are instability of technologies and markets, growing insecurity and uncertainty, deregulation, and greater demands from the public sector. Moreover, they reveal cultural and structural adjustments in organisations, like streamlined, decentralised companies together with more open organisational limits, otherwise absolute ‘limitless’ ventures (Whetten & Cameron 2011). It has been proposed that it is the enhanced complicatedness of society and its more rapid tempo which demonstrate the need for leadership. Therefore, as claimed by Fullan, “[t]he more complex society gets, the more sophisticated leadership must become” (Storey 2004, 11). This essay critically evaluates effective leadership in modern organisations. Effective Leadership in Modern Organisations The way towards success in modern organisations essentially rests on the character of the core attitudes and the proportionate actions, sentiments, and ideas created by the leader. When a leader produces an idea and thus raises a sentiment, the same sentiment and idea are drawn from people and other components in the environment that are present both outside and within the organisation. The ideas or mindset of an effective leader have persistence and are communicable. The ideas of a leader thus serve an integral function in building not just the prospect for him/herself, but also the future for the organisation (Zaccaro 2007). Organisational culture emerges mostly from its leadership at the same time as organisational culture can also influence the growth of its leadership. As stated by Bass (1990), transactional leaders, for instance, operate within the cultures of their organisations conforming to current standards, regulations, and guidelines; on the other hand, transformational leaders transform their culture by learning it and afterward restructuring it with a fresh goal and a transformation of its collective norms, beliefs, and principles. Successful organisations nowadays necessitate leaders’ strategic and calculated judgment, and ability to develop a culture. Strategic judgment facilitates the formation and growth of an image of an organisation’s prospect. The goal can materialize and progress as the leader builds a culture that is committed to strengthening that goal (Kouzes & Posner 2007). The organisational culture is the context within which the goal occurs. Consequently, the goal may establish as well the features of the organisational culture. Transformational leaders have been distinguished by independent traits referred to as transformational leadership’s 4 Is (Northouse 2010). These four elements involve (1) individualised consideration, (2) intellectual stimulation, (3) inspirational motivation, and (4) idealised influence (Northouse 2010, 176-180). Transformational leaders incorporate ingenious thinking, determination and force, perception and understanding into the necessities of other people to build the foundation for a strategy-oriented culture for their organisations. On the contrary, transactional leaders are distinguished by conditional incentive (Bass 1990). Basically, transactional leaders facilitate transactions or arrangements with their subordinates, specifying what the subordinates will gain if they perform well or commit mistakes. They operate within the current culture, orienting their judgments and behaviours based on the existing guidelines and standards distinguishing their own organisations. In a quite ingenious and rewarding organisational culture one is likely to witness transformational leaders who develop ideas like complicated issues are addressed at the lowest level; everybody has a special role to play; and individuals are responsible and determined (Jackson & Parry 2011). Leaders who cultivate this kind of cultures and communicate them to subordinates normally display a sense of direction and good judgment. They orient others to the goal and motivate them to commit to a bigger task towards goal attainment. These leaders support and educate subordinates. They promote a culture of innovative transformation and progress instead of that which preserves the existing order (Zaccaro 2007). They shoulder the duty to train and improve their subordinates. Their subordinates function under the notion that all members of the organisation should be enhanced to their maximum capacity. There is a continuous relationship between leadership and culture. Leaders build structures for cultural growth and the strengthening of attitudes and standards articulated within the limits of the culture. Cultural standards emerge and evolve due to the leaders’ focus, response to issues or problems, attitudes, and appeal (Northouse 2010). The attributes of an organisational culture are determined by its leadership and espoused by its followers. On the one hand, a leader allows no departure from the protocol, managing-by-exception--- a method through which only the data that show a major departure of concrete outcomes from the intended or projected outcomes are reported to the management--- in a very transactional way (Storey 2004). On the other hand, a leader compensates subordinates when they exercise policies in an innovative fashion or if they violate them when the organisation’s general objective is most favourably served (Vroom & Jago 2007). As further argued by Vroom and Jago (2007), the way leaders respond to issues, reward and reprimand subordinates, and resolve conflicts are all vital to an organisational culture, including the manner a leader is perceived both externally by customers or patrons and internally by subordinates. As previously stated, the culture influences leadership to the extent that leadership influences culture. A well-built organisational culture, for example, with standards and inner internal rules for greater self-determination at lower ranks, can discourage higher level management from raising its respective authority to the detriment of middle-level management (Kouzes & Posner 2007). More particularly, the culture can influence how judgments or decisions are reached as regards to the tasks of job assignment, selection, and staffing within the organisation. Thus, leaders have to be considerate of the traditionalism echoed in rituals, practices, ideas, and principles entrenched in the culture that can hamper attempts to transform the organisation. They have to change major features of culture to match new objectives established by the organisation’s membership and leadership (Kouzes & Posner 2007). For instance, they can create new practices to supplant the old, several of which represent the importance of change itself. According to Daft (2008), as organisations move forward, outside forces evolve obliging the organisation to re-evaluate its profoundly embedded principles and beliefs. New members of the organisation will also question profoundly entrenched principles even if organisations usually recruit individuals who have the same principles as that of the organisational culture (Daft 2008). Therefore, it is expected of the leaders to understand the growth of principles and standards as an evolutionary mechanism, a mechanism through which the organisation and its members regularly challenge its values and transform them if the circumstances allow such adjustment. Reflection and Development Plan There is no single most excellent way to lead a modern organization. Rather, in harmony with the notion of equifinality—the rule that in open systems a specific outcome can be obtained by numerous possible methods--- organizational leadership can be performed in numerous distinct ways, consistent with the leader’s personal capabilities, inclinations, and strategies (Storey 2004). Nevertheless, that reality does not mean that individual differences among organisational leaders are immaterial to their success as leaders. In contrast, the success of an organisational leadership rests greatly on (1) the leader’s capacity to use the positive messages of experiences to broaden and improve his/her abilities and knowledge; (2) the leader’s ability to practice attitudes demanded by his/her mental model; and (3) the precision and fullness of the mental model of the leader (Routledge & Carmichael 2007). As emphasised in our practical sessions, every leader has a mental model that orient their decisions and behaviour. We have named a number of options and compromises that may offer a strong groundwork for a mental model of organisational leadership. For instance, as shown in our practical sessions, a training programme could assist organisational leaders in recognising the necessity for organisational success of having a substantial, decisive, and challenging objective by drawing upon case studies or examples of successful and unsuccessful organisations, or may educate them about the value of proper timing in training programmes by exploration of materials showing organisational leaders in actual work contexts. If an organisational leader does not have any previous knowledge of what it takes to successfully lead organisations, s/he can gain knowledge of it, even though the process of learning will probably require ‘unlearning’ several established beliefs about the attributes of effective organisational leadership. In truth, that process of unlearning may be quite difficult partly because leaders are not likely to acknowledge their own ineptitude (Northouse 2010). Therefore, encouraging leaders to cultivate more precise mental models initially involves ‘challenging’ their normally established beliefs through proving the incompetence of such beliefs. According to Whetten and Cameron (2011), dealing with any consequent resistivity and other emotional defensiveness to unfamiliar outlooks about organisational leadership can be a much harder learning undertaking than the coaching of the new ideas themselves. It is not enough for leaders of modern organisations simply to have a practically inclusive and precise leadership paradigm; they also require sufficient talent in acting in harmony with the requirements of their paradigm. Two forms of abilities are fundamental to successful organisational leadership: behavioural and diagnostic (Northouse 2010). Successful organisational leaders cautiously carry out their strategies, focusing them on those areas of an organisation’s relationship, its system, or its environment where the considered measure is both doable and has the potential to produce a significant and positive outcome. To select those strategies effectively necessitates diagnostic abilities (Whetten & Cameron 2011). Successful leaders are capable of taking out from the difficulty of the performance state those issues that are analytically important. These issues, as we discussed in our practice sessions, which sum up what is taking place in the group or its environment, are afterwards evaluated against what the leader thinks is ought to be taking place to recognise organisational attributes or communication structures that are not what they have the potential to be. After accomplishing this, the leader is now equipped with the opportunity to develop strategies that have a realistic potential to reduce the disparity between the ideal and the actual. Besides their capacity to diagnose organisational dynamics and work contexts, effective organisational leaders are also able to implement measures that reduce the disparity between an organisation’s current context and what might be (Bennis 2007). Leaders possessing a strong and comprehensive selection of behavioural abilities are much capable of accomplishing this than leaders possessing limited behavioural abilities (Zaccaro 2007). In view of these arguments, I have developed some strategies to improve my own leadership skills: (1) Work with a leadership guru. Find someone whom I feel confident with and learn from him/her. With optimism, these interactions will open my horizon to new experiences and ideas; (2) Invite opinions and accept criticisms. Look for other people eager to give direct, truthful, decisive opinions or criticisms. I should look for opinions from a multitude of viewpoints; (3) Be compassionate. Be an attentive listener. I should create an approachable impression so that people around me will not be hesitant to raise their concerns; and (4) Persevere to gain the integral leadership features in any way possible. I should strive to possess the ‘axioms of effective leadership’ such as healthy attitude, moral worth, and so on. Conclusions Leading modern organisations requires much more than the ability to raise positive thoughts and feelings among followers, even though this is an integral component. Moreover, it is much more than guiding the organisation, even though this, as well, is important. While the practices or outcomes demanded of organisations become more flexible and less predetermined, leadership turns out to be more and more complicated because another point of reference or approach is needed. Leaders of modern organisations should be focused on forming and steering dynamic mechanisms of measures, judgments, and actions. The training of leaders who have the required abilities may be a challenging mission, but still achievable. What seems to be needed is acknowledgment of leadership’s organisational function and structure of training and development programmes purposely adjusted to that function. References Bass, B.M. (1990) “From Transactional to Transformational Leadership: Learning to Share the Vision,” Organisational Dynamics, Vol. 18, Iss. 3, Winter, pp. 19-31. Bennis, W. (2007) “The Challenges of Leadership in the Modern World,” American Psychologist, Vol 62, No 1, pp. 2-5. Daft, R.L. (2008) The Leadership Experience, 4th Ed., Ohio: Thomson South-Western. Jackson, B. & Parry, K. (2011) A Very Short, Fairly Interesting and Reasonably Cheap Book about Studying Leadership, 2nd Ed., London: Sage. Kouzes, J.M. & Posner, B.Z. (2007) The Leadership Challenge, 4th Ed., San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Northouse, P.G. (2010) Leadership Theory and Practice, 5th Ed., London: Sage Publications. Routledge, C. & Carmichael, J. (2007) Personal Development and Management Skills, London: CIPD. Storey, J. (2004) Leadership in Organisations: Current Issues and Key Trends. London: Routledge. Vroom, V.H. & Jago, A.G. (2007) “The Role of the Situation in Leadership,” American Psychologist, Vol 62, No 1, pp. 17-24. Whetten, D.A. & Cameron, K.S. (2011) Developing Management Skills, 8th Ed, Harlow: Pearson. Zaccaro, S.J. (2007) “Trait-based Perspectives of Leadership,” American Psychologists, Vol 62, No 1, pp. 6-16. Read More