Leadership is defined as the ability of a person to influence other people to do things which they would not have done without the influence. People with this ability are referred to as leaders and can be found in different settings and contexts. In organizational setting, leaders are responsible for planning, coordinating and controlling organizational functions and activities towards attaining organizational goals and objectives.
My leadership style is participative leadership. With this style, all members of the team are involved in identifying essential goals and strategies for attaining those goals. The leader facilitates the attainment of the set goals and objectives (Bolden, Hawkins & Gosling, 2011).
Strengths
One strength of the style is that it leads to teamwork because the leader encourages the active participation of all team members in the achievement of the set goals and objectives. It also leads to enhanced employee performance as well as productive work environment. Through the style, employees’ morale, capacity and relations are greatly improved.
The style leads to innovativeness because employees use their talents and skills to their fullest. Employees are also free to express their creativity since they are encouraged to participate in making decisions which affect their work.
Weaknesses
One weakness of the style is that if not properly managed, it can lead to job dissatisfaction because it gives the employees more say in decision making by allowing them to make decisions on matters affecting their work and decisions regarding how to discharge their duties. Such freedom can make the employees overwhelmed, leading to confusion and ambiguity due to lack of a central authority.
If the style is not properly managed, it can lead to poor employee performance and increased turnover. The lack of a central authority for decision making may create confusion in the workplace leading to low performance and increased turnover. It can also lead to duplication of duties or even failure to perform some tasks due to ambiguity and confusion.
Trait leadership has to do with leaders acting upon leadership traits which they were born with. The leadership style does not embrace the idea that leadership can be learned or acquired from experience but rather perceives leadership as a quality people are born with. Trait leadership style, therefore, leads to excellent results because the leaders have leadership qualities at birth and they are able to lead even without any formal training or education (Daft, 2008).
One similarity between trait and participative leadership styles is that in both, the leaders have a great influence on their followers. The leaders are capable of directly inspiring the employees to become motivated and focused on realization of good results. Through the influence of the leaders, employees become agents of change in their organizations.
In both styles, the leaders are capable of initiating, implementing and managing organizational change. Their ability to inspire the employees makes it easy for them to implement change with little or no resistance because the employees consider themselves as part and parcel of their organizations and for this reason; they always put the interest of their organizations before their personal interests.
Both participative and trait oriented leaders have an exceptional ability to create and sustain a cohesive organizational culture. A cohesive organizational culture is one in which all members of an organization hold to similar beliefs and values which bring them together as an organization.
In cohesive organizational culture, it does not matter the organizational structure but what matters is the commitment of each and every member of the organization to the organizational beliefs and values. Just like participative style, trait leadership leads to establishment of teams which work together.
These teams give themselves a social identity which bides them together. This social identity and bonding lead to cooperation among the team members in all aspects, which brings forth a multiplicity of ideas about how to undertake the tasks consequently leading to innovation in organizations.
Lastly, the two styles lead to increased productivity because the employees are committed to the success of their organization and to them; motivation comes as a result of organizational success, not individual success. Every employee, therefore, brings his or her ideas in the organization. These ideas are combined and transformed into new ways of doing things in a more efficient and effective manner.
The difference is that with participative leadership, the leader may not be highly knowledgeable but can use his or her skills to create a cohesive organizational culture. With trait leadership, the leader is knowledgeable and possesses high technical know-how, especially in research and development.
The knowledge and technical know-how by the trait oriented leader when combined with other charismatic characteristics directly provokes employees’ thinking on how to improve the functions, processes and procedures of their organization, thus leading to innovation.
With contingency leadership style, leaders adopt different leadership styles with different people and at different times. The nature of work done, level of skills of the team and the needs of the leader makes him or her adopt this style.
With contingency leadership, the leader links his or her effectiveness to the prevailing environment. Consequently, effective leaders need to adopt a leadership style depending on the situation and employees’ competency and commitment.
The similarity with participative style is that both have the aspect of success based on teamwork. Employees in the two styles are also highly motivated because the leaders focus on creating a culture of self-motivation rather than supervision.
The difference is that with contingency leadership style, the leader keeps on changing his or her style of leadership depending on the situation while with participative style; the leader does not change his or her style but always tries to involve employees in decision making at all times. Blending together the different leadership styles can bring effective leadership.
Blending trait leadership principles with participative leadership may enhance the team’s leadership capacities. Trait leadership principles, when blended with transformational, transactional and situational leadership styles, may improve the leaders’ social interaction abilities, capacity to initiate ideas, innovation and ability to listen to team members.
Furthermore, the styles can be blended to create a highly motivated team that can contribute positively towards the achievement of organizational goals (Bolden, Hawkins & Gosling, 2011).
Trait leadership, in particular, makes the participative leader have charisma which enables him or her to inspire the team members to realize good results. Contingency leadership style enables the participative leader to change his or her leadership style depending on the situation, thus becoming more efficient and effective.
In some organizations, there may be several leaders, each with a different style of leadership. One major problem of different leadership styles in one organization is that they lead to conflict of ideas which may eventually develop into work-related conflicts. In an attempt to outwit each other or to gain influence in the workplace, leaders may engage in a witch hunt, sabotage and open hatred of their colleges (Wart & Suino, 2012).
Trait leadership style, in particular, has the potential of creating conflict of ideas in the workplace because trait oriented leaders may sometimes exhibit dictatorial traits which may create conflict due to the failure of trait oriented leaders to consult other leaders or even the employees when making some important organizational decisions.
The other problem which may be created as a result of various leadership styles in the workplace is lack of a sense of direction for an organization which occurs as a result of conflicting ideas on the best approach to manage and transact organizational business. The lack of direction may lead to stagnation of the organization.
One way to overcome the problem of conflict of ideas is by having all leaders reach a consensus on the best leadership style for their organizations. This can be done by organizing seminars or conferences on leadership for all leaders or managers for the organizations.
During such seminars, the leaders should be given the opportunity to express their views freely, ideas and opinions on what they think is the best leadership style for their organization depending on the organization’s mission and vision. They should also be given the opportunity to openly criticize the ideas of each other in a constructive manner.
Afterward, they should agree by majority the best approach of leadership. Eventually, a consensus can be attained because no leader would feel that his or her suggestions are not valued by the organization. The problem can also be solved by having a clear chain of command in which every employee is answerable to a specific senior manager.
By so doing, the several centers of power are eliminated. Having a clear chain of command also enhances consultations instead of competition and conflict. The problem of lack of a sense of direction in an organization due to conflicting leadership styles can be solved by having a clear mission, vision and organizational goals and objectives.
These should be backed by a very clear strategic plan outlining what is expected of every employee within a given time frame. Having a clear mission and vision makes all leaders and managers in organizations to understand what the organization wants to achieve and by what means. This can help reduce conflicting ideas because the strategic plan acts as a guide to the leaders on how to achieve the set goals and objectives.
It can also be solved by having a technical team which is concerned with the sole responsibility of inventions and innovations. The technical team should collect the views of employees on the best way to discharge their duties and come up with fresh ideas on how to move the organization forward to avoid stagnation and lack of sense of direction.
One potential advantage that may be created between the leadership styles is that of increased competitiveness for organizations. Each leadership style has a unique attribute for increased productivity. Combining various leadership styles can lead to enhanced job satisfaction among the employees since all the styles are focused on the employees’ welfare and improvement of the working environment.
The combination of the styles can also make employees and leaders develop and embrace a learning culture which makes the organization be in a position to improve on its areas of weakness, thus leading to increased productivity. Trait leadership may inspire employees to become innovative because trait oriented leaders are not mechanistic in their leadership, but they understand the importance of allowing employees to micromanage their activities at the workplace to achieve the best results.
When employees are given the permission to micromanage their work, they develop a positive attitude towards their work which makes them work hard to achieve the best. They are also able to change the rules governing their work and try new ways of doing things. Through this, they are able to discover new approaches to their work.
If for example employees who work as marketing agents are allowed to micromanage their work, they can recommend new types of products which they think are the best for the customers. Participative leadership may inspire teamwork because it is all about making everybody in an organization participate in the process of moving the organization forward.
The participation is not only about the performance of duties but also about making decisions which affect the work being performed. Since everybody is actively involved in organizational activities, the ‘big boss’ syndrome is eliminated thus creating a culture in which all members of an organization feel as part of a big team with a clear mission and vision to attain.
Employees view each other as members of one family and for this reason; they do not hesitate sharing their thoughts, ideas, challenges and strengths with their fellow employees. If for example, an employee has a problem, he or she reveals it to the other employees who then come up with ideas and suggestions on how to solve the problem amicably.
Similarly, if an employee has an idea on how to increase organizational efficiency, he or she is free to share with the others and put the idea into practice. The contingency approach may inspire a change of leadership depending on the situation because the style is based on the philosophy that each organization is unique and therefore there is no a general approach to leadership.
Due to this philosophy, leaders are able to change their tactics of leadership to suit the situation. They have to consider the nature of followers in terms of their education, cultural background as well as their social and economic status. For instance, the way a leader should lead uneducated followers is not the same way he or she should lead educated followers.
In the case of uneducated followers, the leader may need to apply some degree of authoritarianism while in the case of educated followers; he or she may need to be democratic and diplomatic. The need to change the style is based on the belief that the end justifies the means, which means that the leader must find the best way of realizing good results at any given situation or context.
When all these are combined, the end result is an organization with a conducive environment for innovation which is very crucial in increasing organizational competitiveness. One can capitalize on the above advantages to increase productivity by capitalizing on the strengths of each leadership style. If employees are able to work without supervision, it means that they are motivated and have the interest of their organizations at heart.
Under the trait leadership, employees are able to focus on the end result and come up with their own ways of meeting the set targets which ensures that employees are able to meet important deadlines in their lines of duty. If all organizational activities are undertaken in a timely manner, organizations are able to implement their projects with a high success rate which leads to increased productivity.
At the same time, since employees like imitating the trait oriented leaders, they are ever focused on their role in their organization and this increases efficiency and effectiveness, which are essential for increased productivity. The contingency approach enables leaders to be flexible in their leadership. As a result, the participative leader is able to treat each situation differently, thus leading to enhanced success of all the activities undertaken by the employees.
The ability of a leader to be flexible in his or her leadership style means that the leader is result-oriented and not bound by procedures, rules or regulations, but he or she is free to change tact with the overall objective of realizing good results. Flexibility in leadership leads to increased efficiency and effectiveness, making the organization to increase its productivity.
At the same time, leaders must find ways of dealing with the weaknesses of each leadership style. By so doing, an organization is able to have increased productivity due to increased employee motivation, innovativeness and good working environment as well as excellent employer-employee relationships.
References
Bolden, R., Hawkins, R., & Gosling, J. (2011). Exploring Leadership: Individual, Organizational, and Societal Perspectives. Oxford: OUP Oxford.
Daft, R.L. (2008). The leadership experience. Mason, OH: Thomson/South-Western.
Wart, M.V., & Suino, P. (2012). Leadership in public organizations: an introduction. Armonk, N.Y: M.E. Sharpe.