Leadership demands self-improvement and self-renewal to continue. Leaders make decisions that create the future and above all, successful leaders of today dare to desire. They must dominate the events around them while maintaining an atmosphere of dignity and mutual respect. In this paper, we would be discussing on the roles and responsibilities of leaders in creating and maintaining a healthy organizational culture.
The ability to look at the world as it is and view something new and improved is a valued leadership trait. Leaders with this quality have been able to create something new by breaking down the barriers caused by existing paradigms that once stifled progress. They have been innovative, creative, flexible, responsible and not afraid to experiment. Many organizations consist of multi-disciplinary teams as a way of doing business. This system may work well until a problem occurs. The teams' behavioral interaction may change and they may begin finger-pointing and apportioning blame, instead of finding solutions cooperatively. For example, the marketing department may look at what is perceived to be a distribution problem. Instead of the unnecessary finger pointing, marketing adopts the customer's perspective and suggests a solution to solve the problem. Ideas and solutions can be found in some of the most unlikely places and leaders should not be too quick to dismiss the less than obvious. Once the idea or solution has been sourced, one should not be afraid to experiment and take risks to invest in ideas that show promise, even if it means trying the idea again and again in different variations.
To understand management and leadership better, it is essential to analyze the role of leaders in creating and maintaining a healthy organizational culture. Fred E. Fiedler and his associates at the University of Illinois have suggested a contingency theory of leadership (Fiedler, 1967). The theory holds that people become leaders not only because of the attributes of their personalities but also because of various situational factors and the interactions between leaders and group members.
On the basis of his studies, Fiedler described three critical dimensions of the leadership situation that help determine what style of leadership will be most effective (Miner, 1982, p.22):
Position power is the degree to which the power of a position, as distinguished from other sources of power, such as personality or expertise, enables a leader to get group members to comply with directions; in the case of managers, this is the power arising from organizational authority. As Fiedler points out, a leader with clear and considerable position power can obtain good followership more easily than one without such power (Bowers, 1975, pp.167-180).
With the dimension of Task structure, Fiedler had in mind the extent to which tasks can be clearly spelled out and people held responsible for them. If tasks are clear (rather than vague and unstructured), the quality of performance can be more easily controlled and group members can be held more definitely responsible for performance.
Fiedler regarded the dimension of Leader-member relations as the most important from a leader's point of view, since position power and task structure may be largely under the