I would like to give special acknowledgement to XXX director, XXX for his consistent support and motivation. I am grateful to XXX, Associate professor in XXXX , for his innovation and vision , advice and excellent guidance. He not only gave my project a scrupulous critical reading, but added many examples and ideas to improve it. 2 I am grateful to XXX (Sr Hr executive and whole staff members of XXX co for providing me an opportunity to complete my project under their guidance. I am highly indebted to them for the same.
Teamwork is essential for competing in today’s global arena, where individual perfection is not as desirable as a high level of collective performance. In knowledge based enterprises, teams are the norm rather than the exception. Team leadership plays a critical role in fostering commitment, accountability, and team success. The Team leader must ensure that the right mix and level of skills are resident on the team.
They are also responsible for effectively managing 5 relationships outside the team, overcoming obstacles to success, and creating leadership opportunities for others. Good leaders are made not born. If you have the desire and willpower, you can become an effective leader. Good leaders develop through a never ending process of self-study, education, training, and experience. To inspire your workers into higher levels of teamwork, there are certain things you must be, know, and, do. These do not come naturally, but are acquired through continual work and study.
Good leaders are continually working and studying to improve their leadership skills; they are NOT resting on their laurels. Before we get started, lets define leadership. Leadership is a process by which a person influences others to accomplish an objective and directs the organization in a way that makes it more cohesive and coherent. Leaders carry out this process by applying their leadership attributes, such as beliefs, values, ethics, character, knowledge, and skills. Although your position as a manager, supervisor, lead, etc. ives you the authority to accomplish certain tasks and objectives in the organization, this p o w e r does not make you a leader…
Leadership differs in that it makes the followers w a n t to achieve high goals, rather than simply. All teams must shape their own common purpose, goals and approach. While a leader must be a working member of the team who contributes, she also stands apart from the team by virtue of her position as leader. A team expects their leader to use that perspective and distance to help them clarify and commit to their mission, goals, and approach.
Do not be afraid to get your hands dirty (lead by example), but always remember what you are paid to do (get the job done and grow your employees). The term “styles” has become more prominent in popular culture over the last decades, but its origins lie in psychological research on learning and personality. The original concept of style is that we all have preferences for the WAY we do things — think, relate to others, interact, learn. Kurt Lewin, in the 1930’s identified three major styles — autocratic, democratic, and laissez faire, while Rensis Likert defined Exploitive 6
If you have the time and want to gain more commitment and motivation from your employees, then you should use the participative style. Participative (democratic) This type of style involves the leader including one or more employees in on the decision making process (determining what to do and how to do it). However, the leader maintains the final decision making authority. Using this style is not a sign of weakness, rather it is a sign of strength that your employees will respect. This is normally used when you have part of the information, and your employees have other parts.
Note that a leader is not expected to know everything — this is why you employ knowledgeable and skillful employees. Using this style is of mutual benefit — it allows them to become part of the team and allows you to make better decisions. Delegative (free reign) In this style, the leader allows the employees to make the decision. However, the leader is still responsible for the decisions that are made. This is used when employees are able to analyze the situation and determine what needs to be done and how to do it. You cannot do everything! You must set priorities and delegate certain tasks.
This is not a style to use so that you can blame others when things go wrong, rather this is a style to be used when you have the full trust and confidence in the people below you. Do not be afraid to use it, however, use it wisely! Forces A good leader uses all three styles, depending on what forces are involved between the followers, the leader, and the situation. Some examples include: 13 o Using an authoritarian style on a new employee who is just learning the job. The leader is competent and a good coach. The employee is motivated to learn a new skill.
The situation is a new environment for the employee. Using a participative style with a team of workers who know their job. The leader knows the problem, but does not have all the information. The employees know their jobs and want to become part of the team. o Using a delegative style with a worker who knows more about the job than you. You cannot do everything! The employee needs to take ownership of her job. Also, the situation might call for you to be at other places, doing other things. o Using all three: Telling your employees that a procedure is not working correctly and a new one must be established (authoritarian).
Asking for their ideas and input on creating a new procedure (participative). Delegating tasks in order to implement the new procedure (delegative). o Forces that influence the style to be used included: task. o Internal conflicts. o Stress levels Type of task. Is it structured, unstructured, complicated, or simple? o Laws or established procedures such as OSHA or training plans. Positive and Negative Approaches There is a difference in ways leaders approach their employee. Positive leaders use rewards, such as education, independence, etc. to motivate employees. While negative employees emphasize penalties.
While the negative approach has a place in a leader’s repertoire of tools, it must be used carefully due to its high cost on the human spirit. Negative leaders act domineering and superior with people. They believe the only way to get things done is through penalties, such as loss of job, days off without pay, reprimand employees in front of others, etc. They believe their authority is increased by freighting everyone into higher lever of productivity. Yet what always happens when this approach is used wrongly is that morale falls; which of course leads to lower productivity.
Also note that most leaders do not strictly use one or another, but are somewhere on a continuum ranging from extremely positive to extremely negative. People who continuously work out of the negative are bosses while those who primarily work out of the positive are considered real leaders. 14 Use of Consideration and Structure Two other approaches that leaders use are: Consideration (employee orientation) – Leaders are concerned about the human needs of their employees. They build teamwork, help employees with their problems, and provide psychological support.
Structure (task orientation) – Leaders believe that they get results by consistently keeping people busy and urging them to produce. There is evidence that leaders who are considerate in their leadership style are higher performers and are more satisfied with their job. Also notice that consideration and structure are independent of each other, thus they should not be viewed on opposite ends of a continuum. For example, a leader who becomes more considerate, does not necessarily mean that she has become less structured. Paternalism Paternalism has at times been equated with leadership styles.
Yet most definitions of leadership normally state or imply that one of the actions within leadership is that of influencing. Leadership is influencing people — by providing purpose, direction, and motivation — while operating to accomplish the mission and improving the organization. ” The Army further goes on by defining ‘influence’ as a: means of getting people to do what you want them to do. It is the means or method to achieve two ends: operating and improving. But there? s more to influencing than simply passing along orders. The example you set is just as important as the words you speak.
And you set an example — good or bad — with every action you take and word you utter, on or off duty. Through your words and example, you must communicate purpose, direction, and motivation. While ‘paternalism’ is defined as (Webster): a system under which an authority undertakes to supply needs or regulate conduct of those under its control in matters affecting them as individuals as well as in their relationships to authority and to each other. o Thus paternalism supplies needs for those under its protection or control, while leadership gets things done. The first is directed inwards, while the.
Latter is directed outwards. 15 It seems that some picture paternalistic behavior as almost a barbaric way of getting things accomplished. Yet, leadership is all about getting things done for the organization. And in some situations, a paternalistic style of decision-making might be required; indeed, in some cultures and individuals, it may also be expected by not only those in charge, but also the followers. That is what makes leadership styles quite interesting — they basically run along the same continuum as Hofstede’s PDI, ranging from paternalistic to consultive styles of decision making.
This allows a wide range of individual behaviors to be dealt with, ranging from beginners to peak performers. In addition, it accounts for the fact that not everyone is the same. However, when paternalistic or autocratic styles are relied upon too much and the employees are ready and/or willing to react to a more consultive type of leadership style, then it normally becomes quite damaging to the performance of the organization. There are a number of different approaches, or ‘styles’ to leadership and management that are based on different assumptions and theories.
The style that individuals use will be based on a combination of their beliefs, values and preferences, as well as the organizational culture and norms which will encourage some styles and discourage others. • Charismatic Leadership • Participative Leadership • Situational Leadership • Transactional Leadership • Transformational Leadership • The Quiet Leader • Servant Leadership Additional research • The Managerial Grid: Blake and Mouton’s people-task balance. • Lewin’s leadership styles: Three original styles. • Likert’s leadership styles: from autocratic to participative. •
Six Emotional Leadership Styles: from ‘Mr. Emotional Intelligence’, Daniel Goleman and friends. • Post-hoc Management 16 Charismatic Leadership Charismatic Leadership is defined by Max Weber as “resting on devotion to the exceptional sanctity, heroism or exemplary character of an individual person, and of the normative patterns or order revealed or ordained by him”. He defines Charisma as “a certain quality of an individual personality, by virtue of which he is set apart from ordinary men and treated as endowed with supernatural, superhuman, or at least specifically exceptional powers or qualities.
These are such as are not accessible to the ordinary person, but are regarded as of divine origin or as exemplary, and on the basis of them the individual concerned is treated as a leader (… ). How the quality in question would be ultimately jud ged from an ethical, aesthetic, or other such point of view is naturally indifferent for the purpose of definition”. Charismatic people have a remarkable ability to distill complex ideas into simple messages (“I have a dream”); they communicate by using symbols, analogies, metaphors and stories.
Furthermore they relish risk and feel empty without it, they are great optimists, they are rebels who fight convention, and they may seem idiosyncratic. Charismatic leaders are pictured as organizational heroes or magic leaders who have the social power basis to orchestrate turnarounds, launch new enterprises, inspire organizational renewal, and obtain extraordinary performance from organizational members. These leaders inspire trust, faith and belief in themselves. Of course none of this is a guarantee that the mission will be correct, ethical, or successful. Origin of the Charismatic Leadership model.