Introduction
The relationship between the character traits of leaders and their followers is essential for understanding various aspects of organizational performance. This issue is discussed in the research article written by Ahmad. This author examines the effects of leader-follower personality congruence on employees’ performance and the extent of their satisfaction with their work (Ahmad 396). This paper will discuss several questions related to this study.
Much attention should be given to the key concepts used by the scholar. Moreover, one should describe and interpret the results presented in this article. Overall, Ahmad’s research indicates that the similarities in the character traits of leaders and subordinates can increase workers’ job satisfaction and improve their performance; nevertheless, the outcomes also depend on the organizational environment, especially the leadership style of managers.
Innovation in Homogeneous and Heterogeneous Teams
In his article, Ahmad discusses the peculiarities of homogeneous and heterogeneous teams. While evaluating the effectiveness of such groups, one should determine which of them is better for innovation. It seems that heterogeneous teams are usually more conducive to innovation. The main characteristic of such groups is that they include people with different backgrounds, worldviews, and values. Therefore, they can look at the same problem from different perspectives.
These individuals may not agree on everything, but their cooperation can lead to new solutions. By contrast, homogeneous teams include people who share certain viewpoints, beliefs, and values. As a rule, they tend to adopt similar approaches to workplace tasks. In such an environment, people are less likely to introduce innovations.
One should note that this issue is not the main question of Ahmad’s study. However, this author refers to various research articles indicating that diversity or heterogeneity of teams is associated with improved problem-solving and creativity (Ahmad 397). The scholar also points out that sometimes, the similarity in the character traits of leaders and subordinates can have a negative impact on performance (Ahmad 404). Thus, one can suppose that heterogeneous teams tend to be better at innovation.
Complementary and Supplementary Fit
The article written by Ahmad is focused on such notions as complementary and supplementary fit. Both of them mean that a person has successfully adjusted or integrated oneself into the workplace environment (Ahmad 397). Nevertheless, one should not overlook a significant difference between these concepts. Complementary fit is used to describe a situation when an individual has a quality or qualities that other members of the group lack (Ahmad 397). In its turn, the notion of supplementary fit means that a person embodies the traits that his or her coworkers have or want to have (Ahmad 397).
Complementary fit appears to be more conducive to innovation than supplementary fit. A person, who has the qualities that his or her colleagues do not have, can suggest new ideas or methods of solving existing problems. By contrast, an individual, who shares common personality traits with his or her colleagues, tends to think in the same manner. Furthermore, he or she will try the same methods that his or her coworkers used in the past. Therefore, this worker will not add much value to the team.
The Main Findings
In this study, Ahmad describes a method of operationalizing or measuring organizational fit. Firstly, the author suggests that the individual and his or her environment should be assessed with the help of the “commensurate dimensions” (Ahmad 397). It means that a scholar has to apply the same measures while describing the characteristics of an employee and his or her workplace environment. Additionally, a researcher should make a clear distinction between the objective and subjective assessment of organizational fit.
For instance, while describing the performance, Ahmad focused on people’s subjective evaluation of their work and some objective indicators like the percentage of defective units produced by a person (401). This approach is helpful in determining the extent of the congruence between a worker and the workplace. To measure the congruence between the personalities of leaders and subordinates, Ahmad relied on the 16 factor test (400). This assessment tool helped him compare their personalities and attitudes towards each other.
The findings suggest that leader-follower personality congruence can have several positive impacts on the organization. Firstly, the similarity in character traits is essential for increasing employees’ satisfaction with the quality of management (Ahmad 402). Additionally, it makes people more content with their job and workplace activities (Ahmad 402). However, the researcher also notes that in some organizations, the similarity in the personality of leaders and followers can have a negative effect on performance. These findings prompted the author to focus on the reasons for this phenomenon.
The Differences Between Company One and Company Two
It should be mentioned that Ahmad conducted the study in two companies. These organizations represented the same industry; nevertheless, there were some differences in the results. For example, in Company One, the increased congruence of leaders and followers tended to produce a negative effect on the performance of employees (Ahmad 404). This effect was not observed in Company Two where the similarity of leaders’ and followers’ characters was associated with improved performance (Ahmad 406). Moreover, the positive effects of congruence on employees’ satisfaction with their job were much stronger in Company Two (Ahmad 404).
To account for these differences, the author focuses on the rules and practices adopted in these enterprises. For instance, in Company One, the employees did not regularly engage in face-to-face communication with their managers. Very often, workers talked to managers only when some serious mistakes were made (Ahmad 407). Consequently, they could regard these meetings as something unpleasant.
In their turn, business administrators at Company Two attempted to establish closer relations with their subordinates. Unlike managers at Company One, they did not only check and direct the activities of employees (Ahmad 407). On many occasions, they worked together with these people and performed the same tasks. Thus, workers could be more committed to achieving the objectives set by the management. Nevertheless, Ahmad acknowledges that this explanation is one a hypothesis that still has to be confirmed (408). On the whole, it is essential to consider the leadership style of managers as a factor that influences organizational performance.
Conclusion
The study by Ahmad suggests that the character traits of leaders and followers have a strong influence on the work of organizations. The congruence of their personalities can increase employees’ satisfaction with their work and improve the relations between colleagues. However, much attention should also be paid to the culture of the company and the leadership styles adopted by managers. These variables can also have a strong impact on the performance of workers and their attitudes towards the company.
Work Cited
Ahmad, Kamarul. “Relationship Between Leader-Subordinate Personality Congruence and Performance and Satisfaction in the UK.” Leadership & Organization Development Journal, vol. 29, no. 5, 2008, pp. 396-411.