Introduction
The mere mention of an organisation calls to mind two important aspects. The leader of an organisation and the type of organisation matter a lot. People tend to associate with organizations that have sound leadership because such leadership devotes time to effecting necessary changes needed to steer an organisation from one level or stage to the other.
Leadership implies a team that is under a leader, for such a leader cannot work alone. Various theories of leadership explain how a leader can influence change in an organisation and the steps required to effect such organizational changes. Conversely, poor leadership can lead to the collapse of an organisation.
This essay seeks to look at different leadership theories, the concept of leadership and how effective leadership effects organisational change.
The Concepts of Leadership and Organisation
Leadership is a multifaceted concept that has attracted heated debate regarding its origin. Different schools of thought offer different ideas on whether leadership is inherent or learned (Grint, 2004). The different schools might not agree on the origin of leadership but they do agree on the definition of a leader based on the role in an organisation.
As such, a leader refers to a person who initiates the direction for a team in an organisation and who secures the team’s commitment to fulfil laid down goals (Grint, 2004). In addition, it is the duty of such an individual to motivate the team for better results in an organisation (Carneiro, 2002).
Such a person has both authority and legitimate power to influence desired changes in an organisation. Precisely, a leader is an individual vested with authority and power to carry out roles in an organisation and who executes change through other people (Carneiro, 2002).
How Leadership Theories Contribute To Effective Organisational Change
Trait Theories
This group of theories stress that effective leaders exhibit various features or traits. As such, various leadership traits still exist in writing and individuals who become assume leadership roles are encouraged to follow them. Such traits range from physical features, intellectual capabilities, personality characteristics as well as mannerisms and skills (Senior & Fleming, 2006).
However, no combination of such traits can guarantee effective leadership (Benincasa, 2012). Bill Gates provides a good example of leader based on personal trait. His intelligence and knowledge regarding software applications are traits that have stood as special and make him a leader in that field. Trait theory is not effective in describing who an effective leader ought to be.
The theory looks at characteristics in a person, usually inherent, but fails to come up with a combination of traits that can identify a leader (Benincasa, 2012). In addition, several people possess same characteristics yet not all of them become leaders (Senior & Fleming, 2006). Trait theory cannot explain this.
For instance, bill Gates is intelligent yet there are so many other intelligent people in the world yet they may never become leaders. Trait theory does not contribute to effective organisational change since it relies on physical features of a particular person at a given time.
If the organisation relies on the particular trait for continuous change, it might become hard for an organisation to achieve continuous change if such an individual leaves the organisation.
Contingency Theories
This group of theories holds that a leader’s effectiveness manifests depending on the prevailing situation. As such, no single style of leadership gets universal recognition but instead, a leader becomes more effective if the leader is able to work in different modes that best deliver in any given situation (Senior & Fleming, 2006).
Fieldler’s contingency model emphasizes three important aspects, which influence a leader’s performance (Business balls.com, 2013). The first aspect is the level of interaction that exists between a leader and junior members in an organisation. This aspect explores the extent of the staff members trust on a leader and if such a leader inspires them or not. (Senior & Fleming, 2006).
The second aspect refers to the nature of roles assigned to employees (Business balls.com, 2013). Under this aspect, the leader must take into consideration whether the employee’s task is routine or non-routine and how leadership can benefit to the optimum from such an employee.
Lastly, the theory looks at the extent to which a leader is able to gauge an employee’s performance as well as allocating appropriate compensation (Wall Street Journal, 2012).
The path-goal theory emphasizes that an effective leader arises from the ability to combine leadership traits, contingency aspects as well as environmental factors (Wall Street Journal, 2012). Contingency aspects include such employee characteristics as the level of experience, level of education and personal motivation (Carneiro, 2002).
This theory emphasizes that leaders must support their teams by lying down the right direction to follow and eradicating any blockades along the way so that team members achieve set goals. As such, a leader must adopt different traits in different situations, which include clarification of direction, supportive, participative, and achievement types of leadership (EMyth, 2011).
Nelson Mandela is a vivid example of a leader under contingency theory of leadership. After spending over 25 years in jail, he served as a president for only one term since South Africa needed complete transition (EMyth, 2011). Contingency theory faces criticisms based on three major realities.
First, the theory cannot explain why leaders endowed with particular leadership styles become more effective than other leaders. It fails to explain why, for instance, task-oriented leaders do well in extreme situations but fail in average situations.
Secondly, concerning the Least Preferred Co-worker (LPC) scale used in contingency theory, it is hard for an individual to place their ratings of a colleague on the scale since the individual does not know the impact of such an action. There is no correlation with other standard leadership analysis. It is almost impossible for an individual to measure their style by analysing a colleague.
Lastly, contingency theory fails to explain what options an organisation has in case the leadership qualities do not match with the situation at hand (Senior & Fleming, 2006). Should the organisation hire another leader to carry on?
This theory does not contribute to effective organisational change since focus is on the leader and his reaction in given circumstances (Senior & Fleming, 2006). According to the theory, it is quite hard then for organisations to get a leader who can adapt to all situations in an organisation.
Behavioural Theories
This group of theories shifts from the individual traits to patterns of leadership. As such, different groups of behavioural patterns stand for different leadership styles. This group has three types of leaders depending on the mannerisms of individuals (Guttman Development Strategies, N.d.).
The first type is the autocratic leadership. Autocratic leaders come up with decisions without any consultation (Guttman Development Strategies, N.d.). It is appropriate in situations that require immediate decisions, where no input is required and when the consensus of a team is not a prerequisite to success (Guttman Development Strategies, N.d.).
However, autocratic leadership might lead to less objectivity where the leader has stakes that conflict with overall goals of an organization (Management Study Guide, 2013).
The second type of behavioural theory is the democratic leadership where a leader solicits the input of team members and encourages team members to contribute as much as possible (Dems, 2011). This type of leadership is necessary when consensus of a team is necessary for things to move on.
However, this style can lead to difficulties in managing especially when numerous differences come up between individuals (Dems, 2011). Donald Trump fits in this category of democratic leadership because of his insistence on teamwork (Dems, 2011). The last type of theory under this group is the laissez-faire leadership where leaders do not interfere with the team leaders but allow them to make individual decisions (Carneiro, 2002).
In a highly capable, motivated and trained team, this theory is most appropriate to effect organisational change (Carneiro, 2002). However, it can lead to inappropriate decisions from team members especially where such members do not understand the goals of the team clearly (Carneiro, 2002).
Further, if this style originates from the laziness of a leader, it can be disastrous (Dalgish & Miller, 2010). Thomas Jefferson is a clear example of a laissez-faire leader. He believed that a hands-off government is the best for the people (Dalgish & Miller, 2010).
Power and Influence Theories
These types of theories focus on how different leaders achieve different results, what means they use and the leadership styles generated from such achievements (Mind Tools, 2013). The first of this group is the French and Raven’s five forms of power, which identifies three kinds of power (Mind Tools, 2013). These powers include legitimate power, reward power and coercive power.
According to the theory, there are two types of sources of personal power including one’s expertise and personal traits (Benincasa, 2012). Reward power refers to the idea that the leader is in a position to reward hardworking employees (Mind Tools, 2013).
Coercive implies resultant punishment for those who do not follow the leader’s directive (Mind Tools, 2013). Legitimate power flows from the position that a leader occupies on the hierarchy that grants powers to order and supervise others (Smith, 2013).
Leaders should apply personal power often but personal power arises from expert power and therefore, leaders must endeavour to become experts in their fields to gather the much-desired power. In other words, employees will more often subscribe to leaders who can articulate ideas and show expertise whenever need arises (Grint, 2004).
Transactional leadership also uses power and influence (Benincasa, 2012). According to this approach, the basic motivation is reward and no other motive. Precisely, employees do what they do to receive compensation in various ways. It is a less appealing type of leadership but leaders apply it on a daily basis to get tasks done (Benincasa, 2012).
For instance, if an employee needs a salary increment, a leader might increase production targets for the employee and peg the increment on hitting production targets. Any coach of athletic team is a good example of transactional leader (Burns, 2003). Such coaches train the team to work hard to achieve individual goals.
The theories discussed so far rarely lead to organizational change since they have their own shortcomings and do not work in isolation. For instance, contingency theory requires that an effective leader act in various ways depending on the circumstances. This is not very viable since individuals have different traits and different situations can call for traits that a leader lacks.
Does it then mean that a leader who is democratic but cannot exhibit autocratic aspects when required is less effective? Does it mean that all democratic leaders are effective? Transactional leadership assumes that all that an employee needs from work done is compensation. This is not true since some employees work to improve their talents or better still, to grow their careers (Changing Minds.org, 2013).
President John F. Kennedy was a power and influence leader as seen in his push to change the attitude of white American people towards the black people (Cherry, 2012).
Transformational Leadership Theory
Transformational leadership theory looks at how a leader influences team members to change their attitude and acquire trust, admiration and respect towards leadership as the basis for effecting desired changes (Cherry, 2012).
A transformational leader transforms team members through enhancing their knowledge of the importance and value of the task, assisting them focus on the organisational objectives and igniting their own needs (Changing Minds.org, 2013).
Transformational leadership consists of four aspects necessary to effect organisational change (desgriffin.com, Web). The first aspect, intellectual stimulation, enables the leader to challenge the existing structures and methods (Changing Minds.org, 2013). In addition, a transformational leader encourages innovativeness among team members by adopting new methods of doing things (Changing Minds.org, 2013).
A transformational leader offers individualized backing and encouragement to team members (Hall, Johnson, Wysocki, & Kepner, 2013). Such leaders keep open- door policy and encourage team members to share whatever ideas they have at any given time to enable the leader recognize each of the team members.
Thirdly, transformational leaders present team members with an inspirational motivation through formulation and articulation of a clear vision (Changing Minds.org, 2013).
They are able to inject passion in the team members and to keep the morale of the team high. Lastly, transformational leadership offers idealized influence to team members by serving as role models and leading from the front through examples (Cherry, 2012).
Sam Walton, a founder member of Wal-Mart, was a transformational leader. He frequently visited employees to show his appreciation for their good work in the various outlets (Hall, Johnson, Wysocki, & Kepner, 2013).
Transformational leadership accomplishes organisational change because it starts by transforming the individual and makes the individual to desire change, to improve and ultimately effect the required change right from the individual level.
Such leadership is keen on fulfilling the needs of the employees (Hall, Johnson, Wysocki, & Kepner, 2013). When all focus is on employees’ needs first, such employees can become proud and complacent.
Conclusion
Change is inevitable in every situation and more so for organizations that thrive in a competitive environment. Organisations that resist change lose out and at times collapse. Change manifests in areas of employee motivation, financial discipline and increase as well as physical changes like building designs among others. To effect such changes, a leadership willing to steer an organisation to achieve change must be in place.
Several theories on leadership exist and each can contribute to organisational change but transformational theory caps it because of its insistence on changing and appreciating the employee first. It is inspiring at its best and transformational leaders easily effect organizational changes with ease.
Reference List
Benincasa, R. 2012, 6 Leadership styles, and when you should use them. Web.
Burns, J. 2003, Transforming leadership: a new pursuit of happiness (1st Edition). New York: Atlantic Monthly Press.
Business balls.com. 2013, Leadership theories. Web.
Carneiro, A. 2002, ‘When leadership means more innovation and development’. Journal of Business Strategy Series, vol. 9, pp. 176-184.
Changing Minds.org. 2013, Bass’ transformational leadership theory. Web.
Cherry, K. 2012, Transformational leadership. Web.
Dalgish, C., & Miller, P 2010, Leadership: understanding its global impact. Prahran: Tilde University Press.
Dems, K. 2011, Famous Examples of Different Leadership Styles. Web.
desgriffin.com. Web, Transformational leadership. Web.
EMyth 2011, The five core leadership skills. Web.
Grint, K. 2004, What is leadership? from hydra to hybrid. London: Oxford University Press.
Guttman Development Strategies, Leadership team alignment. Web.
Hall, J., Johnson, S., Wysocki, A., & Kepner, K. 2013. Transformation leadership: the transformation of managers and associate. Web.
Management Study Guide 2013, Role of a leader. Web.
McNamara, C. 2013, Organizational Change and Development. Web.
Mind Tools. 2013, Core leadership theories. Web.
Senior, B., & Fleming, J. 2006, Organizational change. New York: FT Prentice Hall.
Smith, R. I. 2013, Models of reward management. Web.
Wall Street Journal. (2012). Leadership Styles. The Wall Street Journal. Web.