Wind sukhumvit 23 think of living

Discussion Post - Organizational Leader Concept

Week 1: What is Meant by Leadership and Who are Leaders?

Theme 1: Understanding the nature of leadership helps to frame the viewpoint of a leader

Although many scholars have defined leadership, but the definition of leadership is dynamic. This week, we will discuss the definitions of leadership to understand the field of study upon which we are about to embark. The definition of leadership has significantly changed over the past generation to meet the needs of a contemporary business environment. In fact, many scholars have disagreed on the nature or essential characteristics of leadership but instead have offered a variety of perspectives as to what leadership is not. As we discuss the contemporary definitions of leadership, pay close attention to various definitions and compare them to those of prominent leaders today. Are they similar? If so how? If not, why not?

Read:

Pages 18-22 (you will read the rest next week) of: Gandolfi, F., & Stone, S. (2017). The Emergence of Leadership Styles: A Clarified Categorization. Review Of International Comparative Management / Revista De Management Comparat International, 18(1),

Simon Sinek on Leadership at TED

What is Leadership?

Aldrin, A., and Gayatri, R. (2014, August). Leadership Not a Title Nor a Position. International Journal of Current Research and Academic Review, 2(8), 356 – 366. Retrieved from http://www.ijcrar.c

Satel, G. (2014, June 1). To Create Real Change, Leadership Is More Important Than Authority

Theme 2: The evolution of leadership theory can help to explain what makes a good leader today.

The second theme for week 1 details how the definition of leadership has adapted to fit the changing business environment. Changes in the definition of leadership are reflected in how leadership has been viewed by scholars. Leadership theory took root in

https://learn.umuc.edu/d2l/home/420546
https://learn.umuc.edu/content/enforced/420546-001034-01-2198-OL4-7981/The%20Emergence%20of%20Leadership%20Styles%20-%20A%20Clarfied%20Categorization.pdf?_&d2lSessionVal=0YKnitbivm2p5fhD8dN3HrPYm
https://youtu.be/o1Jz5p0RH-s
https://www.forbes.com/sites/kevinkruse/2013/04/09/what-is-leadership/#66ba86a15b90
http://www.ijcrar.com/vol-2-8/Anitha%20Aldrin%20and%20R.Gayatri.pdf
http://www.digitaltonto.com/2014/to-create-real-change-leadership-is-more-important-than-authority/
p y p y the social science fields of sociology and psychology. People wanted to know what made a good leader and whether they could become a good leader by adapting the “good” traits. Debate still rages on in leadership research as to whether leadership is inborn or learned. By examining leadership theory this week, we will begin to define leadership in terms of answering the question of what should Biotech's leaders look like for success today. The evolution of leadership theory illustrates how leaders have perceived the act of leading and how the psychology of leading people interfaces with the real job of leading others. How one views and defines leadership influences the beliefs, values and behaviors maintained while leading and relating to others.

As mentioned earlier, leadership experts have perspectives/ theories about leadership. It is important to understand the history of leadership theories, because it will help define the way leadership is today. The business environment controls the view of the leader as it controls the actions needed for a company to survive. By reviewing the chart below and the leadership theories from the attached readings, it should become clear to you how leadership has evolved. Understanding how leadership theory has evolved to meet the needs of the organization over time will help to define us as leaders today.

Decade(s) 1950-60 1960-80 1980-2000

Theories Great Man/Trait Behavior/

Contingency

Influence

Organizational Structure

Vertical/

Pre-bureaucratic

Vertical Hierarchy/

Bureaucratic

Horizontal/Cross-Team

Leader View Single Hero Command and Control Team/Change Leade

Decade(s) 1950-60 1960-80 1980-2000 Environment Post-War Stable American Business

Growth/ Stable MNC Dominance/Japan

Model/ Chaotic

Source: Adapted from Daft, R. L. (2010). The leadership experience (5th ed.). Boston, MA: Cengage Learning

TAKE AWAY POINT FROM LEADERSHIP THEORY EVOLUTION

The flow from “Great Man” views of leadership to “Learning Leader” illustrates that the view of good leadership is colored by the demands of the business landscape of its time. Leadership and its definition is dynamic and complex. Leadership changes in response to the needs of the organization.

Presently, many business leaders are continuing to transition from the “Calm Chaos” of the latter half of the 20th century to the “Turbulent Chaos” of the 21st. Leaders are focusing on change management, facilitating vision and values to encourage high performance and continuous adaptation. New theorists, such as Jacob Morgan, are modeling the organizations of today blending the vertical structures of the 80’s and 90’s

with the flat structure of the 21st century. Morgan (2015b) maintains that it is costly and inefficient to dismantle the vertical structures that currently house many of the viable business organizations. Instead, Morgan (2015a) proposed a new structure known as a “flatarchy,” that can be relatively flat yet can create an ad hoc hierarchy to work on a project or function and then disband when finished. The organization can also have a loose hierarchy that can flatten when required and then return to a loose hierarchy when the need is over. The leader of today must find ways to transition quickly from the old to the new. Implementing fast change and getting people to accept and implement the change is the greatest task facing leaders.

The leader must combine the “soft” skills of leadership with the “hard” skills of management to effectively guide an organization.

Understanding the evolution of leadership theory helps a leader to define the contemporary concept of successful leadership by identifying strengths and weaknesses

of scholarly perspectives from the past to the current time, and explore the relationship of leaders to the business environment.

Introduce Yourself! Discussion Topic

References

Morgan, J. (2015a, July 20). The 5 Types of Organizational Structures: Part 2, 'Flatter' Organizations. Retrieved October 24, 2017, from https://www.forbes.com/sites/jacobmorgan/2015/07/08/the-5-types-of-organizational- structures-part-2-flatter-organizations/#33fcf6e6dac3

Morgan, J. (2015b, July 20). The 5 Types of Organizational Structures: Part 4, Flatarchies. Retrieved October 24, 2017, from https://www.forbes.com/sites/jacobmorgan/2015/07/15/the-5-types-of-organizational- structures-part-4-flatarchies/#6865b2ca6707

Read:

The Most Important Leadership Theories The Hersey-Blanchard Situational Leadership Theory The Relational Leadership Model What Does Leadership Look Like in the Future of Work?

Complete:

Review syllabus Post your introduction Participate in week 1 learning activities - Initial response due by Thursday, 11:59 p.m. eastern time. Follow up response due by Sunday, 11:59 p.m. eastern time.

0 % 0 of 5 topics complete

Kindly tell everyone a few facts about yourself and your aspirations. Provide:

https://learn.umuc.edu/d2l/le/content/420546/viewContent/16073216/View
https://learn.umuc.edu/content/enforced/347722-001034-01-2192-OL1-6381/The%20Most%20Important%20Leadership%20Theories.pdf?_&d2lSessionVal=0YKnitbivm2p5fhD8dN3HrPYm
https://learn.umuc.edu/content/enforced/347722-001034-01-2192-OL1-6381/The-Hersey-Blanchard-Situational-Leadership-Theory-Choosing-the-Right-Style-for-the-Right-People.pdf?_&d2lSessionVal=0YKnitbivm2p5fhD8dN3HrPYm
https://learn.umuc.edu/content/enforced/347722-001034-01-2192-OL1-6381/The%20Relational%20Leadership%20Model.pdf?_&d2lSessionVal=0YKnitbivm2p5fhD8dN3HrPYm
http://www.forbes.com/sites/jacobmorgan/2016/03/28/what-does-leadership-look-like-in-the-future-of-work/#3e0fb23b2eac
How to Analyze a Case Study Word Document

Instructor Notes Web Page

BMGT 365 - Biotech Company Profile (Fall 2019) PDF document

Week 1 Discussion Discussion Topic

Your name Your major/minor Where you are in your degree program Who you work for and what you do How many other courses you are taking at the same time Why you are taking this course and what you are looking to get out of this course

Please note that the "Introduce Yourself" does not count toward participation in Week 1 learning activities

Week 1 Discussion

You will read the discussion below and follow the instructions provided. You will create the memorandum and submit in the discussion area. Post the entire memorandum into the discussion area rather than provide as an attachment.

Do not post in the discussion area until you have written the memorandum. If the seal is broken without posting, a zero for this assignment will be automatically assigned.

You will read the following scenario and provide the memorandum by Thursday, 11:59 p.m. eastern time. By Saturday, 11:59 p.m. eastern time, you will read the memoranda of your classmates and will comment on at least three other classmates addressing the following

Comment on the positive aspects of the memo posted by others. Comments on key leadership language that could be used to strengthen the memo.

https://learn.umuc.edu/d2l/le/content/420546/viewContent/16073251/View
https://learn.umuc.edu/d2l/le/content/420546/viewContent/16073237/View
https://learn.umuc.edu/d2l/le/content/420546/viewContent/16670969/View
https://learn.umuc.edu/d2l/le/content/420546/viewContent/16073238/View
Would you change your response in the memo? If so, why? if not, why not?

By Sunday, 11:59 p.m. eastern time, respond to the classmates who responded to your memorandum.

Read the Following Case Scenario

A recent survey was taken among employees at Biotech Health and Life Products (Biotech). The results were alarming, as it appeared the leadership has been less effective than in the past. Some of the common complaints seemed to focus on the lack of vision, a breakdown in communication and a lack of connection with staff.

You have read the results and as Vice President of Biotech, you completely agree with employees. Leadership is the cornerstone to success in any organization and to permit poor leadership can only spell trouble. It occurred to you that the place to start change was staring you in the face - the new management hires planned for Warehouse Operations in Dallas and Miami. Mumbling to yourself “but what do I want them to look like?” you decide that you must write a memo to HR Director, Jennifer Diaz to make sure the “right” description of a leader is asked for in the soon-to-be released job description. Scrambling around on the desk, you find the old job announcement so that you can make some changes. It reads, “Biotech is looking for experienced warehouse managers who focus on keeping the distribution speed high and shipping costs low. Manager must be able to motivate employees to keep distribution, packing, and shipping moving smoothly and efficiently. Must be someone who can handle a fast-paced environment, is used to meeting deadlines, is driven and results-oriented. Goal oriented and policy adherence critical to succeed in the department.”

Instructions

You will act as the Vice President of Biotech. Write a memorandum to the HR Director, Jennifer Diaz that explains the need for a new job announcement for managers at Biotech. The memorandum will explain how the business environment has changed the view of the leader and defines the vision you have based on synthesizing the course material about leadership theory and definition of a leader in today’s business environment opposed to leaders hired in the past.

In writing the memorandum, use the course material from week 1 (you may also use course material from week 2) to support the reasoning and conclusions made. You will

also use the Biotech Company Profile . Answer the following:

Explain how the existing job announcement for new hires was effective in the past based on the theories and view of leadership through the 1990’s. Explain why the leader of today would no longer fit the definition set out in the old announcement. Describe what a leader looks like today and what theories and leadership definitions support this description.

Memorandum Set Up

Create a Word or Rich Text Format (RTF) document (no pdf files allowed) using 12-point font. A memo is left justified with no indentations of paragraphs. A memo is single- spaced with a double space between paragraphs to make the memo easy to read.

In business, writing must be concise, easy to read and free of writing and grammatical errors.

You are required to use in-text citations with an associated reference list.

Use headings for each element. It is suggested that you set up the memo with all of the required headings and then fill in each section of the memo.

Use a memo format:

To:

From:

Date:

Subject:

Remember, you are sending this memo to the HR Director so this is a formal memo. Proof the memo carefully for typos, grammatical errors and ensure the memo conveys the points you are to address. Why? Because your work products is a reflection of who you are – it is your brand! A good brand can lead to future opportunities in an organization such as a promotion.

Make sure the memo is audience appropriate, concise, coherent, readable, uses appropriate terminology, is professional, provides a factual tone (no opinion and no recommendations), and is visually appealing.

Memorandum Requirements

https://learn.umuc.edu/content/enforced/420546-001034-01-2198-OL4-7981/BMGT%20365%20-%20Biotech%20Company%20Profile%20(Fall%202019).pdf?_&d2lSessionVal=0YKnitbivm2p5fhD8dN3HrPYm
You are sending this memo to the HR Director, Jennifer Diaz. Read the memo to ensure all required elements are present. You also need to use facts from the case scenario and course material to support the ideas and reasoning put forth.

The language in the announcement has to be just right so that Biotech attracts the best candidates. Therefore, it is important to help Jennifer capture the essence of a leader at Biotech.

Make suggestions about language that should appear in the job announcement that supports the definition and characteristics you derived for the leader of today. Provide an explanation so Jennifer knows why the specified language is important to convey the definition and characteristics of a leader;

Make suggestions about language that would not be in the job announcement for this leader;

Provide an explanation why the specific language should not be in the job announcement.

Not just anything is acceptable so make sure to read the course material and make wise selections in creating this memo.

The following items are required in writing the memo. Check off to ensure compliance to the following requirements.

Use the grading rubric while completing the project to ensure all requirements are met that will lead to the highest possible grade.

Third person writing is required. Third person means that there are no words such as “I, me, my, we, or us” (first person writing), nor is there use of “you or your” (second person writing).

Contractions are not used in business writing, so do not use them.

Students will not use direct quotation marks but will instead paraphrase. What this means is that you will put the ideas of an author or article into your own words rather than lifting directly from a source document. You may not use more than four consecutive words from a source document (including the case scenario) or change words in a passage as doing so would require direct quotation marks. Use a passage from a source document by putting into your own words (paraphrase) and attribute the passage to the source document. Changing words

from a passage does not exclude the passage from having to have quotation marks. If direct quotes are presented, they will not be included in the grading.

Use in-text citations and provide a reference list that contain a reference associated with each in-text citation.

Provide the page or paragraph number in every in-text citation presented. Refer to this link for more guidance on how to do this: In-Text Citations - Including Page or Paragraph Numbers

Self-Plagiarism: Self-plagiarism is the act of reusing significant, identical or nearly identical portions of

one's own work. You cannot re-use any portion of a paper or other graded work that was submitted to

another class even if you are retaking this course. You also will not reuse any portion of previously

submitted work in this class. A zero will be assigned to the assignment if self-plagiarized. Faculty do not

have the discretion to accept self-plagiarized work.

https://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/resource/560/10/
18 Volume 18, Issue 1, March 2017 Review of International Comparative Management

The Emergence of Leadership Styles:

A Clarified Categorization

Franco GANDOLFI1

Seth STONE2

Keywords: leadership, leadership styles, leadership categories, categorization

JEL classification: M12, M14

Introduction

The world is in the midst of a leadership crisis. Despite the fact that there is

a vast body of literature on leadership, it has remained one of the most misunderstood

business phenomena (Gandolfi & Stone, 2016). Thus, it becomes of paramount

importance to understand the consequences, both positive and negative, that emerge

from the various known and validated leadership styles found in modern-day

organizations. Further, it is critical to have metrics in the form of known attributes

of effective leadership to serve as a benchmark for the effectiveness of each

leadership style. A thorough understanding of both the potency and effectiveness of

recognized leadership styles will benefit the academic and professional communities

alike.

Therefore, the purpose of this article is to showcase the different leadership

styles in practice in organizations today and to provide a categorization of existing

leadership styles. A key objective of this research is to compare leadership styles to

a functional and comprehensive working definition of leadership. With this in mind,

1 Dr. Franco GANDOLFI, Georgetown University, Email: francogandolfi@hotmail.com 2 Dr. Seth STONE, Regent University, Email: sethmstone@gmail.com

Abstract

The study of leadership has become a prominent scholarly and professional focus

in an ever-changing, multi-dimensional globalized world. Despite abundant scientific and

anecdotal work on the effectiveness and potency of “good” leadership, several leadership-

related questions have remained unanswered. For instance, what does good, effective

leadership look like? What is a leadership ‘style’ at its most basic? What leadership styles

are at a leader’s disposal? While leadership may be seen as one of the most over-

researched topics, it remains one of the most misunderstood phenomena of our time

(Gandolfi & Stone, 2016). This conceptual paper addresses the notion of a leadership style

and purports to categorize the ever-increasing pool of leadership styles that emerge both

in scholarly and professional circles. The paper culminates in a graphic depiction of the

categorization of leadership styles based on the scientific work of Lewin, Lippit, and White

(1939).

mailto:francogandolfi@hotmail.com
mailto:sethmstone@gmail.com
Review of International Comparative Management Volume 18, Issue 1, March 2017 19

this work begins with a brief review of a working definition of leadership and the

key empirically researched attributes of effective leaders. The article then provides

a deeper analysis of the various leadership styles by juxtaposing them against the

authors’ working definition of leaders and the attributes of effective leaders, thereby

providing insights into the positive and negative attributes of each style. Next, the

paper focuses on a definition of what a leadership style is, and highlights various

styles of leadership. Finally, the paper showcases a categorization of leadership,

culminating in a graphic classification of leadership styles (Figure 1).

Defining Leadership

The study of leadership is not new and leadership definitions abound.

Various scholars have attempted to define leadership operationally and theoretically.

Gandolfi (2016) asserts that the combination of five components render a potent

working definition of leadership -(i) there must be one or more leaders, (ii)

leadership must have followers, (iii) it must be action oriented with a legitimate (iv)

course of action, and there must be (v) goals and objectives (Gandolfi, 2016). So

how can leadership be defined? Based on the presented five criteria the following

definition was selected for the purpose of this research:

“A leader is one or more people who selects, equips, trains, and influences

one or more follower(s) who have diverse gifts, abilities, and skills and focuses the

follower(s) to the organization’s mission and objectives causing the follower(s) to

willingly and enthusiastically expend spiritual, emotional, and physical energy in a

concerted coordinated effort to achieve the organizational mission and

objectives.”(Winston & Patterson, 2006, p. 7).

This definition was chosen for two important reasons. First, having surveyed

the leadership literature, Winston and Patterson (2006) provide a definition as it

relates to the components needed for defining leadership as stated above. Second, it

clearly demonstrates that leadership is not one-dimensional. In fact, it requires a deep

understanding about how people play a role in the ultimate success of the mission

and vision of the organization. How leaders develop and grow will be critical to the

effectiveness of the organization; their development as leaders must be intentional

for the organization to reach its stated objectives and goals.

Key Attributes of Effective Leadership

Given that many scholars, professionals, and thought leaders have weighed

into the conversation regarding the attributes of effective leadership, which views

matter most? Research reveals a clear line between those attributes of effective

leadership that are anecdotal in nature versus those that stem from scientific research.

While assertions based on observation and/or personal experience are undoubtedly

valuable marketing tools and often carry some practical wisdom, it is the authors of

20 Volume 18, Issue 1, March 2017 Review of International Comparative Management

this study’s assertion that they do not get the global leadership community any closer

to an understanding of desirable leadership style(s). This paper will focus exclusively

on known attributes of effective leadership grounded in scientific, empirical research.

Before delving into the attributes for effective leadership, it is important to

note two guiding principles, that is, (i) virtually everyone has some capacity to form

leadership relationships, and (ii) leaders are made and not born. Andersen (2012)

postulates that while some people are born with innate qualities and character

attributes that propel and/or accelerate their leadership journey, the vast majority of

people live in a practical reality where their leadership skills must be intentionally

cultivated to achieve their maximum potential leadership output. Such cultivation

cannot happen without relationships (Komives, Lucas, & McMahon, 1998). These

notions bring the conversation full-circle with regard to the guiding principles

provided by the authors of this paper.

Kouzes and Posner (2007) are widely regarded as authorities on the study of

leadership and have produced some of the most authoritative research on the subject

of leadership effectiveness. Over more than thirty years of global research, they have

arrived at five key attributes of effective leadership. These are; (i) to model the way,

(ii) to inspire a shared vision, (iii) to challenge the process, (iv) to enable others to

act, and (v) to encourage the heart (Kouzes & Posner, 2007).

Examining the attributes in more detail, first, to model the way means that

the leader personally demonstrates the behavior they desire or expect to see in their

followers (Brown & Posner, 2001). Second, to inspire a shared vision creates mutual

context between leaders and followers, while clearly demonstrating what the

organization values most (Kelly, 2000). Third, leaders who challenge the process ask

the question, “Why do we do this?” (Galbreath & Rogers, 1999, p. 169). This type of

leader will never be satisfied with a reply that suggests satisfaction with the status

quo (Galbreath & Rogers, 1999). The fourth attribute, to enable others to act, means

the leader does not seek dominant authority, rather the opposite, by giving away

power and decision making ability to followers (Russell, 2001). Fifth, to encourage

the heart is to show an outpouring of sincere care and provide genuine celebration

for achievements and success (Posner, 2015).

These five attributes of effective leadership are highly relational and require

intentional effort by the leader to put into practice, thus, tying directly back to the

two guiding principles for effective leadership that have been presented. It requires

leaders to open pathways for engagement throughout every level of an organization

and with all of its people. In fact, these attributes, once put into practice, are

significantly more follower-centric than leader-centric (Gandolfi & Stone, 2016).

Understanding the follower centricity of effective leadership will aid in

understanding the consequences of the leadership styles presented in a subsequent

section of this paper.

Review of International Comparative Management Volume 18, Issue 1, March 2017 21

What is a leadership style?

While much research exists addressing various leadership styles, there is a

surprising shortcoming of research that examines what a leadership “style” actually

is. It appears to be an unspoken and assumed element of the leadership styles

discussion. Perhaps, this lack of clarity contributes to the widely disparate views on

leadership, and may be one of the reasons that academicians and professionals have

not agreed on what constitutes leadership. Having said that, what exactly is a

leadership style?

First, a look at context is important to help understand why there are so many

different leadership styles. Clearly, the global business community has come a long

way from when Frederick Taylor gave the world the gift of scientific management.

As Buchanan (2013) explains, the world has moved through different phases of

leadership since the early part of the 20th Century. Historically speaking, there was

first the notion of “command-and-control” that prevailed into the 1980s, which was

followed by “empower-and-track” through the mid 2000’s, and, finally, the

“connect-and-nurture,” approach, which is the current approach (Buchanan, 2013).

While not every organization has tracked through this sequence in the provided

timeframe – some have not even caught up to the second phase, much less the third

that Buchanan presented - this progression provides a high level understanding and

illustrates dramatic shift points that may help explain why there are so many viable

leadership styles in existence. Further, the early theories of leadership made the

assumption that good leadership was based on traits (Shazia, Anis-ul-Haq, & Niazi,

2014). Whether it is personality, charisma, or physical features such as appearance,

many simply believed, and some still do today, that leaders are born and not made.

It was the notable psychologist Kurt Lewin and his team (1939) who

introduced through their research that leaders could be made and were not

necessarily just born. In their seminal work, Lewin, Lippit, and White (1939)

categorized and introduced three leadership styles that set the framework for future

styles to emerge (Martin, 2015) – autocratic, democratic, and laissez-faire.

Subsequent styles that emerged began to focus on the leader/follower relationship

and how the actions of one will impact the other (Shazia et al., 2014). This was a

significant step forward for the leadership styles movement. With this historical

understanding in mind, it appears as if the research and practice communities are far

from nearing the finish line when it comes to fully understanding and agreeing upon

an optimal leadership style. Thus, it is of paramount importance to understand and

define what a leadership style actually is.

Three key elements involved in pragmatically leading people have helped

researchers arrive at the myriad of existing leadership styles and will likely inform

new ones that have yet to emerge. First, Armandi, Oppedisano, and Sherman (2003)

note that leadership is about influencing a group of people in the direction of a

decided common goal. Whether one believes that leaders are born or made, scholars

and practitioners agree that leadership involves influence regardless of the chosen or

inherent style. While influence can be difficult to understand given its immeasurable,

22 Volume 18, Issue 1, March 2017 Review of International Comparative Management

intangible nature, influence forces movement both literally and philosophically.

Additionally, leadership is highly intentional. Rooke and Torbert (2005)

assert that differences among leaders are not determined by their philosophy of

leadership, personality, or even style of management, at least according to most

developmental psychologists. Instead, it is how they read and interpret their

surroundings and how those interpretations influence reactions in the midst of

challenges. Most successful leaders, no matter their preferred style, make

organizational decisions based on a process and philosophy of leadership. This

requires a high degree of self-awareness, emotional intelligence, and environmental

context both inside and outside the organization, all of which will never happen

accidentally (Rooke & Torbert, 2005).

A third key point is that leadership has as much to do with perception as it

does with reality. This should come as no surprise given how often business leaders

are heard using the common colloquialism ‘perception is reality’. Despite its

pithiness, there is great psychological power in this reality. According to McDermott,

Kidney, and Flood (2013), leadership effectiveness in the eyes of followers is closely

tied to the leader being driven, able to inspire, and prioritize needs, which in turn,

produces a sense of safety and calm for followers. Thus, if followers’ perceptions of

what they need in a leader are met, they will feel secure in their leader through a

multitude of different organizational circumstances.

With the understanding that influence, intentionality, and perception are

vital components of practical leadership, the authors of this paper define a leadership

style as follows:

“An intentional means by which a leader influences a group of people in an

organization to a widely understood future state that is different from the present

one.”

This operational definition intentionally leaves space in which a number of

different leadership styles can fit, with the hope of arriving at the most optimal

leadership style through a review of those that are currently accepted.

Styles of Leadership

The two most basic characterizations of the popular leadership styles that

are widely accepted and practiced today are (i) trait based and (ii) skills based styles

of leadership. These juxtapose one another and provide the oldest and most hotly

debated question in the study of leadership theory: Are leaders born or made?”.

Armandi, Oppedisano & Sherman (2003) state that when this old-age question is

discussed, it regularly takes a tone similar to “What came first, the chicken or the

egg?”. It should come as no surprise that this debate has seemed almost futile in

many discussions amongst academics and practitioners alike. While academic

researchers began trying to understand what the innate traits of a leader were early

in the 20th Century, what the trait theory fails to account for is that the environment

Review of International Comparative Management Volume 18, Issue 1, March 2017 23

both inside and outside an organization and the followers within an organization

influence their interaction with a leader (Armandi et al., 2003). In other words, this

confined understanding misses a significant portion of the big picture when it comes

to all that is involved in leading people and organizations. Indeed, such a short-

sighted view of leadership disqualifies the trait theory as an ideal leadership style for

today’s organizations, especially in light of the increasing complexity facing

organizations.

Not unlike the trait approach to leadership, the skills theory is entirely

leader-centric, yet completely counter to the trait approach in that the skills theory

states that leadership can be developed through the intentional approach of building

known and accepted leadership skills (Northouse, 2007). Thus, it presupposes that

leaders are made and not born. This appears to be a step in the ‘right’ direction from

a leadership development perspective, but again with such a limited view, this theory

would need to be significantly expanded to account for organizations and people.

However, this theory did provide some meaningful guidance for new theories that

would emerge over time.

Situational leadership theory, for instance, essentially boils down to

“situational favorability” (Horner, 1997, p. 271). This matches an organizational

situation to the skills of the leader in an effort to determine how positive or negative

the outcome of a particular organizational situation might be and what type of

leadership skill sets might be required, based on where the organization currently

stands or is attempting to go. This game of matchmaker would suggest that,

depending on conditions both inside and outside the organization, leadership could

change significantly and regularly over time; in contrast, long tenure for leaders has

the potential to produce organizational unrest with leadership. Situational leadership

theory deals with follower readiness for where the leader is attempting to take them

and the organization (Silverthorne, 2000). Thus, there are multiple forces at work in

attempting to match the appropriate leader within a given organizational situation.

This theory lacks the critical element of follower development presented in the

adopted definition of leadership in this research inferring instead that organizations

seek the right person for the right moment in time and little else. Thus, it is plausible

to conclude that there is not enough long-term sustainability tied to this theory to

make it the most ideal or desired leadership style.

The contingency leadership style is squarely based on the organization. It

proposes that the effectiveness of a leader will depend solely upon the organizational

context to determine if the leader’s style will be effective or ineffective (Northouse,

2007). This is a one-to-one relationship between the leader and the current reality of

an organization. Like situational leadership, the followers could have influence on

the contextual present of the organization. However, nowhere does this style take

into account the needs of those who are following the leader toward the

organizational mission.

Shifting gears once again, transactional leaders often tend to focus on

transactions in furtherance of a set of goals rather than show concern for the people

executing those goals (Yahaya & Ebrahim, 2016). While this style of leadership

24 Volume 18, Issue 1, March 2017 Review of International Comparative Management

focuses more on the interaction of the leader and the follower than each of the

previous examined styles, the focus is still on output and production, which is

ultimately for the benefit of the organization. Presumably, any set goals are more for

the benefit of the organization than for those who serve in it. In the transactional

leadership style, leader- or follower-orientation is predicated on a set of mutual

benefits (Tung, 2016). In other words, the leader makes it clear to the follower, if

you give me X, I will give you Y. Sales roles provide a great generic example here

and most often those roles are in the best interest of the organization. Thus, it may

be concluded that the transactional leadership style is a mission (organization) first

style of leadership.

The leader member exchange (LMX) style of leadership in its most basic

sense is about working dynamics; the more effective the working relationship is, the

closer the leader and follower are and, presumably, the follower becomes more

effective in their work, with the inverse also presumed to be true (Northouse, 2007).

This leadership style has been colloquially referred to as the “in club” and the “out

club”. This should make one question the health of these types of dynamics, as this

style suggests that being on the boss’s “good side” is the best path forward. It is

highly personal in nature, which brings its focus toward the leader/follower

orientation, or people (employees) first at the initial glance. However, the ultimate

measure of this style is about worker effectiveness, once again supporting the needs

of the mission before those of its people.

Transformational leadership is built on the premise of “idealized influence,

inspirational motivation, intellectual stimulation, and individualized consideration”

(Gregory, Moates & Gregory, p. 807). This style is highly people or employee centric.

The leader must appeal to the ideals of the followers in order to influence them. The

leader’s goal is to inspire the employees and motivate them toward the vision that

they have created for the organization. These leaders stimulate the intellect of their

followers by helping them be a part of the solution; such leaders genuinely care about

the individuals in the organization. This style is so close to servant leadership that it

can be difficult for many to distinguish between the two. The key point of

understanding when it comes to the transformational leadership style is that the

leader engages the followers as closely as he or she does, in order to solicit their

efforts in achieving the vision he or she has set, because, the leader knows that he or

she cannot achieve the vision alone. Thus, the transformational leadership style is

most definitely a mission (i.e., organization) first style of leadership.