Personal Leadership Style and Managerial Tasks
A manager’s personal leadership style—that is, the specific ways in which a manager chooses to influence other people—shapes how that manager approaches planning, organizing, and controlling (the other principal tasks of managing). Consider Laurie Glimcher’s personal leadership style as described in “A Manager’s Challenge.” She empowers employees, emphasizes doing what’s best for patients, and fosters an environment for collaboration among the organization’s varied medical specialties. Managers at all levels and in all kinds of organizations have their own personal leadership styles, which determine not only how they lead their subordinates, but also how they perform the other management tasks. Michael Kraus, owner and manager of a dry cleaning store in the northeastern United States, for example, takes a hands-on approach to leadership. He has the sole authority for determining work schedules and job assignments for the 15 employees in his store (an organizing task), makes all important decisions by himself (a planning task), and closely monitors his employees’ performance and rewards top performers with pay increases (a control task). Kraus’s personal leadership style is effective in his organization. His employees generally are motivated, perform highly, and are satisfied—and his store is highly profitable. Developing an effective personal leadership style often is a challenge for managers at all levels in an organization. This challenge is often exacerbated when times are tough, due, for example, to an economic downturn or a decline in customer demand. The recession in the late 2000sprovided many managers with just such a challenge.
Servant leader is a leader who has a strong desire to serve and work for the benefit of others. They have a strong desire to work for the benefit of others. Servant leaders share power with followers and strive to ensure that followers’ most important needs are met, that they are able to develop as individuals, that their well-being is enhanced, and that attention is paid to those who are least well-off in a society. Servant leadership is unique as a leadership approach because the leader views his or her role more as a motivator and listener, someone who empowers followers to act as collaborators and innovators within the organization.
Leadership Styles across Cultures
Some evidence suggests that leadership styles vary not only among individuals, but also among countries or cultures. Some research indicates that European managers tend to be more humanistic, or people-oriented, than both Japanese and American managers. The collectivistic culture in Japan places prime emphasis on the group rather than the individual, so the importance of individuals’ own personalities, needs, and desires is minimized. Organizations in the United States tend to be very profit-oriented and thus tend to downplay the importance of individual employees’ needs and desires. Many countries in Europe have a more individualistic perspective than Japan and a more humanistic perspective than the United States, and this may result in some European managers’ being more people-oriented than their Japanese or American counterparts. European managers, for example, tend to be reluctant to lay off employees, and when a layoff is absolutely necessary, they take careful steps to make it as painless as possible.Another cross-cultural difference occurs in time horizons. While managers in any one country often differ in their time horizons, there are also national differences. For example, U.S. organizations tend to have a short-term profit orientation; thus, U.S. managers’ personal leadership styles emphasize short-term performance. Japanese organizations tend to have a long-term growth orientation, so Japanese managers’ personal leadership styles emphasize long-term performance
Trait and Behavior Models of Leadership
The Trait Model
The trait model of leadership focused on identifying the personal characteristics that cause effective leadership
The Behaviour Model
After extensive study in the 1940s and 1950s, researchers at The Ohio State University identified two basic kinds of leader behaviors that many leaders in the United States, Germany, and other countries engaged in to influence their subordinates: consideration and initiating structure
CONSIDERATION: Leaders engage in consideration when they show their subordinates that they trust, respect, and care about them. Managers who truly look out for the well-being of their subordinates, and do what they can to help subordinates feel good and enjoy their work, perform consideration behaviors.
INITIATING STRUCTURE Leaders engage in initiating structure when they take steps to make sure that work gets done, subordinates perform their jobs acceptably, and the organization is efficient and effective. Assigning tasks to individuals or work groups, letting subordinates know what is expected of them, deciding how work should be done, making schedules, encouraging adherence to rules and regulations, and motivating subordinates to do a good job are all examples of initiating structure.
Fiedler’s Contingency Model
Fred E. Fiedler was among the first leadership researchers to acknowledge that effective leadership is contingent on, or depends on, the characteristics of the leader and of the situation. Fiedler’s contingency model helps explain why a manager may be an effective leader in one situation and ineffective in another; it also suggests which kinds of managers are likely to be most effective in which situations. Thing s that influents Fiedler’s Contingency Model are:
•Leader – Member Relations
•Combining Leader Style And The Situation
House’s Path–Goal Theory
In what he called path–goal theory, leadership researcher Robert House focused on what leaders can do to motivate their subordinates to achieve group and organizational goals. Thepremise of path–goal theory is that effective leaders motivate subordinates to achieve goals by
(1) clearly identifying the outcomes that subordinates are trying to obtain from the workplace,
(2) rewarding subordinates with these outcomes for high performance and the attainment of work goals, and
(3) clarifying for subordinates the paths leading to the attainment of workgoals.
Path–goal theory is a contingency model because it proposes that the steps managers should take to motivate subordinates depend on both the nature of the subordinates and the type of work they do.
The Leader Substitutes Model
The leader substitutes model suggests that leadership is sometimes unnecessary because substitutes for leadership are present. A leadershipsubstitute is something that acts in place of the influence of a leader and makes leadership unnecessary. This model suggests that under certain conditions managers do not have to play a leadership role—members of an organization sometimes can perform at a high level without a manager exerting influence over them. The leader substitutes model is a contingency model because it suggests that in some situations leadership is unnecessary.
Bringing It All Together
Effective leadership in organizations occurs when managers take steps to lead in a way that is appropriate for the situation, or context, in which leadership occurs and for the subordinates who are being led. The three contingency models of leadership just discussed help managers focus on the necessary ingredients for effective leadership. They are complementary in that each
Time and time again, throughout business history, certain leaders seem to transform their organizations, making sweeping changes to revitalize and renew operations.
Transformational leadership occurs when managers change (or transform) their subordinates in three important ways:
1.Transformational managers make subordinates aware of how important their jobs are for the organization and how necessary it is for them to perform those jobs as best they can so the organization can attain its goals.
2.Transformational managers make their subordinates aware of the subordinates’ own needs for personal growth, development, and accomplishment.
3.Transformational managers motivate their subordinates to work for the good of the organization as a whole, not just for their own personal gain or benefit.
When managers transform their subordinates in these three ways, subordinates trust the managers, are highly motivated, and help the organization achieve its goals. How do managers transform subordinates and produce dramatic effects in their organizations? There are at least three ways in which transformational leaders can influence their followers: by being a charismatic leader, by intellectually stimulating subordinates, and by engaging in developmental consideration.
Disusun Oleh Kelompok 8 Bravehearted
- Yosi Amelia Putri
- Mahatir M Tamher
- Septian Arif Nugroho