Introduction
A plethora of studies has pointed out that strong leadership is extremely important for business organizations. Business leadership is a term commonly used to refer to the activity of leading a group of individuals, usually considered as an organization. In its essence, business leadership involves a number of things (Peters & Robert 1982, p. 55). First of all, it involves the establishment of a precisely clear vision.
Once this vision has been established, it is then shared with other people in an effort to make them follow it. Information, knowledge, in addition to methods, necessary to realize the established vision is then provided. The other thing involved is balancing and coordinating the interests of all stakeholders perceived to be conflicting.
In case of a crisis, a leader takes the forefront due to his ability not only to think but act as well in a creative manner during difficult moments (Peters & Robert 1982 p. 58). Leadership differs from management since it flows from the core of personality. Unlike management, leadership can not be taught. However, leadership can be learned. In addition, through mentoring as well as coaching, it can be enhanced.
It is indicated in the findings of the research conducted by Cangemie et al (2004, p. 30) that strong and effective leadership demands a captain of a ship and not just an individual who is standing by the helm. Cockerell (2009, p. 61) further asserts that leadership is not passive but active.
Thesis Statement
The forthcoming discussion is intended to provide clear and precise evidence why strong leadership in business organizations is one of the most significant elements. In order to adequately and authentically derive the proof, research will be based on relevant literature and studies conducted on the same.
Discussion
Human nature is built on several contradictions. Basically, each and every person is self centered and tends to think about themselves as winners. However, the truth is that human talents are distributed in a normal manner (Robbins 2007, p. 55).
This implies that there is no human being superior as everyone tends to think he is. Another contradiction is that, like processors of information, individuals are not only simultaneously flawed but delightful as well. On the one hand, human beings can hold little explicitly in their minds.
This means that an enormous pressure of maintaining things remarkably simple in their organizations on managers exist. On the other hand, the unconscious mind of humans is extremely powerful (Cockerell 2009, p. 65).
Another contradiction is that all human beings exist within their environments. They have a high degree of sensitivity in addition to being responsive to external rewards as well as punishments. Indeed, drive comes from within a human being. A further conflict is that human beings act in a way as if expressed beliefs are essential; yet, it is considered that actions speak louder.
It turns out that there is no person that can fool others at any time. Usually, people are proficient in watching out for patterns in their day-to-day actions (Peters & Robert 1982, p. 60). Indeed, human beings are wise as they distrust words that are seemingly mismatching our deeds. People in an organization do not differ much, and therefore these conflicts are present in them (Robbins 2007, p. 59).
In order to deal with these conflicts, it is necessary to have a strong leadership in the organization. With a strong leadership in place, a passionate pride is taken in an effort towards setting high targets for the organization of people.
A strong leadership necessary to deal with these conflicts is the one that establishes productivity teams and productivity development teams among others. Even though the approaches adopted by strong leadership are self- defeating, they are perfectly rational.
Usually, the striking attributes of this symbiotic effect are excitement as well as believability, which are two characteristics of herculean importance if at all an organization wants to realize its goals in an effective manner (Solich 2007, p. 55).
Taking believability into account, top performing business organizations are in most cases led by an individual who grew up with the core of the business. Managers represent their unique ability to engender excitement (Powell 2011, p. 8).
Most businesses where strong leadership has been adopted are attributable with producing a lot of winners. In addition, strong leadership usually constructs these systems in such a way that they celebrate the winning when it occurs. Further, these systems unlike the ones without strong leadership utilize non monetary incentives in an extraordinary manner (Pedler 2010, p. 44).
Among the key attributes of businesses with strong leadership is that they are always aware of the essentiality of maintaining things as simple as possible regardless of the overwhelming genuine pressures to complicate the turn of events. In any organization, staff may simplify matters.
However, the people in the field are irritated by the staff as they are known to make life miserable for them. Once the staff of any organization regardless of the number leaps into an action, information requests, regulations, policies, in addition to instructions on how the staff is performing are being generated. As this becomes the trend, overload of information sets into the system.
It is impossible for short-term memory to bear or process all these information. Therefore, everything in the organization, including its running becomes confused. However, in a business where strong leadership has been adopted, when this ensues, there is always a way to cope with this sort of problem (Robbins 2007, p. 67).
One of the strategies that a strong leader does is intentionally keep the corporate staff number as small as possible. This implies that the number of corporate staff in the business will not generate excessive confusion down the line.
In addition, unlike other businesses, a business characterized with strong leadership usually has a tendency of putting a focus on just a few key business values as well as just a few business objectives (Peters & Robert 1982, p. 67).
Focusing on a few key business values is indispensable as it lets everyone realize what is weighty and what is not. As a result, there is simply less necessity for daily unending instructions, that is, daily short-term memory overload.
In many businesses where strong leadership has been adopted, paperwork is minimal (Rizzatti 2005, p. 10). Indeed, in these organizations, paper work is eliminated by using quick hit task forces.
In addition, these organizations sub optimize; they tend to overlook economies of scale put up with a fair and a considerable amount of internal overlap, mistakes, as well as duplication in an effort towards seeing that they will not have to coordinate each and every activity, which, given their size, these businesses could not do in anyway (Cockerell 2009, p. 69).
It is often argued that the most excellent and successful companies are way they stand since they are organized in such a manner which is necessary to obtain extraordinary efforts from ordinary individuals. Leadership represents a variety of things. Leadership is patience. According to Cangemie et al (2003, p. 33), it is usually a singularly frustrating coalition building.
He further asserts that it is the purposeful seeding of cabals that an individual perceives or hopes will eventually result in the appropriate ferment in the bowels of a business organization.
Further, leadership involves a meticulous shift of institution’s attention through the use of mundane language of systems of management. In addition, leadership entails alteration of agendas in an effort towards seeing that the new policies get more attention.
Furthermore, leadership requires one to be visible whenever things go awry (Rizzatti 2005, p. 19). Further, it requires an individual to be invisible whenever things are working well. According to the findings of a research conducted by Savage (2012, p.36), leadership involves the process of establishing a loyal team at the top, which is responsible for speaking more or less in unison.
According to Rowbotham (2007, p. 76), leadership requires a person to listen in a careful manner in most of the times while frequently imparting encouragement messages through the power of speaking, and reinforcing words with actions that are not only realistic but believable as well.
At times, leadership necessitates a person to be tough whenever necessary. This implies that the person to whom the people in the organization look upon must be more than a leader. He must be a strong leader exhibiting strong leadership skills (Sherman n.d).
A strong leader acts as the mentor, the value shaper, an example, and the one who moulds meanings. Having a strong leader at the helm is indispensable since the strong leadership job is tougher than that of just a leader. He is usually the true artist, as well as the pathfinder.
In an organization, it is essential that the urge for transcendence that unites every employee in the organization is called forth and exemplified. Only a strong leader can see these through (Sherman n.d). A strong leader and his strong leadership are considered to be miles ahead of just leaders as he is able to exhibit consistency spread over long periods of time in support of his transcending values (Rowbotham 2007, p. 80).
A strong leadership holds that there is no opportunity deemed small and that there is no particular forum too insignificant. Further, a strong leader holds that there is no audience that can be regarded as too junior unlike other forms of leadership.
Strong leaders and leadership are always able to make their followers transcend the day-to-day affairs. Leadership that is not strong in its nature is usually preoccupied with power unlike the cases with strong leadership.
Attention to power blinds leaders and results into their inability to install correct purposes. Strong leadership is necessary since it promotes a situation where employees in a business organization interact with one another in a manner that the leaders as well as the employees raise one another together and, therefore, reach higher levels and extents of morality in addition to motivation (Sherman n.d).
Strong leadership is considered to be moral due to its tendency to raise the level of the employee conduct as well as raising the aspiration of not only the leader but the employee as well. This means that a strong leadership, unlike just leadership, has a transforming effect on both the leader and the employee.
An organization attributable to having a strong leadership is dynamic. To elaborate on this, such a leadership involves a leader throwing himself into a relationship with his employees. Subsequently, the employees will feel elevated, and as a result, they become more active. This activity on its part helps in the creation of new cadres of leaders among these employees.
Strong leaders, unlike managers, have the ability to understand other people’s emotions (Peters & Robert 1982, p. 77). It is commonly stated that managers prefer working with people. By contrast, strong leaders prefer stirring emotions. Whenever employees of an organization are exposed to a strong charismatic leadership style, they are not only strengthened but uplifted by the experience, as well.
Such employees feel more powerful unlike other forms of leadership where they feel less powerful and submissive. A system where strong leadership has been adopted does not force the employees to submit and follow the leader by sheer overwhelming magic pertaining to his personality, in addition to his persuasive powers.
Instead, he tends to be influential by way of not only strengthening but inspiriting his employees (Rowbotham 2007, p. 80). Therefore, a strong leadership business environment arouses confidence in the employees. As a result, the employees feel better and are able to accomplish the organizational goals (Powell 2011, p. 1).
Strong leadership in a business crops up a symbiotic effect on the part of the leader and the followers. Usually, the striking attributes of this symbiotic effect are excitement, as well as believability, which are two characteristics of herculean importance if at all an organization want to realize its goals in an effective manner (Solich 2007, p. 55).
Taking believability into account, top performing business organizations are in most cases led by an individual who grew up with the core of the business. A compelling example is HP. Concerning the second attribute, a strong leader’s explicit criterion of choosing managers represents his unique ability to engender excitement (Powell 2011, p. 8).
Strong leadership is a must for any business since the in building of purpose is a challenge to creativity and a leader must have to possess more than just leadership skills. If a strong leadership is not in place, there is a herculean possibility that the business will not achieve its targeted goals (Solich 2007, p. 57).
Perhaps, it may end up deviating from the intended course of action, a clear indication that it is heading to a fall. In building of purpose involves the act of transforming men, as well as groups, from being neutral and technical units into participants with a particular stamp, in addition to sensitivity and commitment.
This implies that this process is indeed educational. According to Hansen (2010, p. 104), a strong and effective leader ought to be aware of the meaning, in addition to mastering the technique of the educator. Mullins (2010, p. 44) asserts that the art of a strong and creative leader is the art or building an organization.
Further, it is the art of reworking of humans, as well as technological materials in an effort towards fashioning an organism, which is supposed to embody new, as well as enduring values.
Zaleznik (2007, p. 67) made a worthwhile note when he indicated that the act of institutionalizing involves infusing values beyond a task’s technical requirements, which is at hand. Only a strong leader can do this. Without the aspect of strong leadership, this motive cannot be realized, and this spells out the essentiality of a strong leadership.
The awarding of the social machinery in a way beyond its technical role, according to Cangemie et al (2004, p. 46), doubly reflects the unique way in which it fulfills both group and personal needs. It does not matter whether people become attached to a business organization.
All that matters is prizing or awarding. Taking the standpoint of a committed employee into consideration, there is prodigious likelihood that the business organization will be transformed from being an expandable tool into a source of personal satisfaction, which is largely valuable.
This can not come if a strong leader is not at the helm. This is an implication that a business leader serves as the primary expert in an effort towards promoting and protecting the values (Mullins 2010, p. 46).
Conclusion
From this analysis, it is clear that a strong leadership in a business is a vigorous and positive thing (Blazek 2011, p. 41). A business organization with strong leadership results in a better relative performance, unlike an organization where strong leadership is not advocated (Pedler 2010, p. 32).
In addition to this, it leads to a situation where the level of contribution from the ‘average man’ is induced. This analysis also established that for both the business organization and society in which the business is build around, a business with strong leadership creates an environment in which people can blossom (Zaleznik 2007, p. 70). In addition, it creates an environment where people can develop self-esteem.
The essence of this is that people will be excited and motivated to participate in the business organization as well as in the society as a whole. Unlike strong leadership, a business organization where strong leadership has not been adopted ends up in creating groups of non excellent performers (Peters and Robert 1982, p. 80).
Further, the employees are almost perverse and always at odd taking every variable into account. In these organizations, it is a norm to lose rather than win. Further, the reinforcement is usually negative unlike strong leadership organizations where reinforcement is positive (Blazek 2011, p. 47).
Guidance in these organizations tends to be arranged by the rule book instead of tapestries or even myths (Mullins 2010, p. 49). In addition, a business organization without strong leadership as its strongholds adopts a method where constraint and control are dominant.
By contrast, in a business organization where strong leadership has been adopted, there is soaring of meaning and there is always a chance to sally forward (Hansen 2010, p. 110). Another shortcoming of an organization where strong leadership is not evident is that there is always politics – a thing that hampers development in addition to sustainability.
In an organization with strong leadership, leading is usually guided by moral and this plays a key role in the achievement of an excellent company’s status (Peters & Robert 1982, p. 85). Overall, strong leadership is a key to the effective running of any organization, and as such, any organization must ensure that it embarks on strategies that will put in place a strong leadership.
References
Blazek, C 2011, Ineffective leadership is costly, Cengage Learning, Belmont
Cangemie, P, Hewwet, L, McQuade T & Jairus, F 2004, ‘The journal of successful management development: Successful leadership practices in turbulent times’, Bradford, Vol. 33 no. 1, pp. 30
Cockerell, L 2009, Creating Magic: 10 common sense leadership strategies from a life at Disney, Doubleday, New York.
Hansen, M 2010, ‘The Best-Performing CEOs in the world,’ Harvard Business Review, Vol. 4 no. 7, pp. 104-113.
Mullins, J 2010, Management and organizational behavior, Prentice Hall, Essex.
Pedler, M.A 2010, Manager’s Guide to Leadership: An Action Learning Approach, McGrow Hill, Berkshire.
Peters, T & Waterman, R 1982, ‘Ch3 ‘Man waiting for motivation,’ The wall Street Journal, Vol. 5 no. 2, pp. 55-86.
Powell, G 2011, ‘The Gender and Leadership Wars,’ Organizational Dynamics, Vol. 40 no. 5, pp. 1-9.
Rizzatti, I 2005, ‘Electronic Business,’ Highlands Ranch, Vol. 31 no. 10, pp. 10-25.
Robbins, S &Timothy, J 2007, Organizational Behavior, Prentice Hall, London, UK.
Rowbotham, F 2007, Operations Management in Context, Butterworth-Heinemann, Oxford.
Savage, N 2012, ‘Director: What makes a good leader,’ London, Vol. 65 no.5, pp. 36
Sherman, T n.d. The differences between effective and ineffective leadership skills, <www.helium.com/items/1086365-good-bad-leadership>
Solich, H 2007, Tips for effective leadership, Thomson Learning, South Melbourne, Victoria.
Zaleznik, A 2007, ’Managers and leaders: Are they different?,’ Harvard Business Review, Vol. 7 no. 3, pp. 67-78.