Introduction
Organisationsal change is a contribution to the organisation leadership. Prudent leadership, therefore, becomes a key to any organisation that aspires to change its way of operation or service delivering to the targeted stakeholders (Cañas, 2001). Change may be witnessed in the terms of goods and services, as well as organisation’s operations in both management and business, among other areas (Yeo, 2001).
The idea behind a business change means a possible risk of value in an organisation. With all these factors being constant, organisations change requires sound decision making from the organisations leadership. It is noted that leaders consider different quality hence subjecting their organisations to different changes (Covey, 2004).
The changes witnessed depend on the leader’s qualities and exposure, among others, like the environment issues. There are various theories of leadership which elaborate how leadership in an organisations affects its possible changes, for example, “Great Man” Theory, Trait Theory, Situational Theory, Behavioral Theory, Contingency Theory, Participative Theory, Management Theory and Relationship Theory (Tomey, 2009).
Each leader may have the qualities of one or more theories, hence contributing differently to the organisation. Leaders mentor, control and manage others in the organisation and organisations development, or any kind of change depends on the top leadership.
A leader that posses many quality factors has an impact all through the business environment hence initiating the most desired changes in the organisation (Novick, 2008).
“Great Man” Theory
According to this theory, leaders are born, and leadership skills are inherited from the parents. According to this theory, leaders are not made, and one must come from a background of leaders hence making this quality to be of particular use in the society (Sennett, 2006). Leaders, as proclaimed by this theory, foster change and stability in there area of operation with courage and stability.
If this theory is used, it then means that the current organisation can not be managed or led by somebody who relies on the education but it is managed by the sons and daughters of former managers or leaders (Novick, 2008). This is a discriminating idea of leadership.
This theory kills innovativeness in the organisations hence leaving all the organisations duties, mainly in decision making, dependent on one leader.
As far as effective organisations change is concerned, “Great Man” theory do not add value, thus all the decisions in an organisations should be resolved by a group of leaders but not by one single great leader because organisations has different department which requires different exposures for one to manage a change (Northouse, 2009).
The use of this theory could not be able to effectively manage a worthy change in an organisation, and everything should be embraced to make change in the area of the operation.
This theory discourages effective organisations change mainly because it creates an fair authority of one particular person within an organisation hence limiting the decision making process whereby all decisions must come from a single leader, and a particular organisations must be led by a particular leader from a particular background (Northouse, 2007).
Holding all the factors constant, this limits diversification whereby different style of leadership is required. Diversification helps to manage different interests in different organisations environment. It is currently encouraged that for an organisation to effectively mange a change, the leaders of different unit must be willing and able to work as a team and not a particular single leader.
This theory is been practiced in political field in countries that do not embrace democracy. This kind of leadership does not embrace change of the notion, both socially and economically, hence been rated as a poor leadership practice (Krajewski, 2010).
Trait Theory
It is similar to the great man theory but it mostly relies on qualities shared by the leaders. Having a similar quality as compared to another leader fails to define the leadership quality due to the changing environment in an organisations (Northouse, 2010). All the same, leaders, according to this theory, do have similar traits. They do not have the same qualities, but they have one objective goal, change.
The ability to change the quality of the organisations goods and services and the organisations culture within the organisations defines a good leader (Larson, 2011). A good leader has a dream and a vision which he or she wishes to achieve within a particular time frame (Larson, 2011).
This is different from the theory’s primary objective whereby it identifies leaders of the same traits but of different goals and vision in a particular area in an organisations. To make a constructive change in an organisations, it turns to be a process but not an event as it can be provided by the theory whereby it identifies leaders with similarities in character and behavior.
A leader who provides a change in an organisations must be willing to push to the accomplishment of his or her goals and vision in that particular area (Morgan, 2006).
If trait theory is a subject to go up with, it means that the individual quality, vision and willingness to change things will not help the organisations to identify the desired leaders but only their similarities in some traits. Similarities in traits can not make a good leader, and hence organisations should embrace a vision leadership for them to uncover change.
Situational Theory
Organisationsal change goes hand in hand with leadership prudence. It is with this notion that situational theory provides a platform where every situation depends on different leader’s action or decision (Northouse, 2010). This theory accommodates different decisions in different organisationsal environments hence facilitating organisationsal change.
Every organisations unit, as far as situation theory is concerned, should have its leader who has the right to consult with other stakeholders within the same unit and come up with a good solution (Northouse, 2010). Therefore, leaders are advised to consult with the others, and decision making becomes a consultative move but not an individual one (Northouse, 2010).
This improves the decision sensitivity, hence making sure that the decision made is relevant to the organisations environment. Effective leadership involves the ability to accommodate others in the organisations as well as gives others a chance freely to express their views concerning a particular subject (Nohria, 2010).
This can improve the decision making process as well as making all stakeholders feel a part of the organisations.On the other hand, this theory embraces organisations culture where everyone plays his/her role without fear hence doing his/her the best (Northouse, 2010). This is a positive move towards the organisations change, both internally and externally.
The theory provides a platform where all are given a chance to contribute to the organisationsal growth or change in a particular area of concern. A leader in this theory must be willing and able to accommodate others, and the decision should be done in a consultative way (Morgan, 2006).
This provides an all inclusive environment where the organisations works as a unit, hence making it easier to make a change or to improve on a particular area of concern.
Financial organisations can provide a good example where situational theory is practiced. It is worth noting that this sector is controlled by the central banks by fixing rates both to control inflation and deflation (Marquis, 2009). Leaders in this sector are expected to adopt what is necessary depending on the environmental change (Marquis, 2009).
Situation leadership style helps the banks continue making profit irrespective of the economic environment facing the industry. If failed to follow the current environmental factors, the financial institution will be subjected to loses.
Behavioral Theory
Leaders are made, and they are not born. This is a key statement of this theory, which accommodates everyone, irrespective of the mental capacity or individual background (Lencioni, 2002.p.53). It is noted that leadership is a process which might start to develop in any organisation stakeholder, irrespective of the individual position in the organisation.
To impact a change in the organisations, all the stakeholders must be willing and able to work to ward the subject area (Nohria, 2010). This can only be achieved if all are given a chance to do their best to achieve the subject goal (Nohria, 2010).
This gives everybody an opportunity to control and participate in decision masking process making the desired goal relevant, and more attention is given to the action of an individual stakeholder as opposed to individual academic and mental capacity. The ability to be flexible both in decision making and implementation makes an impact on different leaders, so everybody has a chance for a personal growth (Larson, 2011).
This helps the organisations manage the current issues mainly because all the stakeholders are given a motivation to make decision and implement it within the organisations. On the other hand, the organisations units stand to grow uniformly hence posing an organisations change.
It is noted that for an organisations to grow and make either social or economic change, all the stakeholders must be involved in the decision making process and implementation of the change, and individual contribution should be given a chance to promote a good organisations culture whereby growth is possible (Krajewski, 2010.p. 34).
The theory provides a platform where effective leadership is exercised, hence providing the ways by which organisations change concept is possible.
Contingency Theory
Contingency theory embraces different leadership style depending on the environment. This is a prudent theory which allows change when it is appropriate (Kouzes, 2007). It is advisable for the organisations leadership to embrace different style to manage the environmental challenges facing the organisations.
In some cases, the leader is expected to make urgent decisions without consulting the others, and in some cases, he/she may give all the stakeholders to participate in decision making process (Hill & Jones, 2009).
The ability to know when to involve others in the decision making process or define everything on his/her own is the leader’s ability to lead. Embracing this theory, it is possible for the organisations to manage the change and effectively deliver the desired quality. By observing contingency theory, the organisations posses an opportunity to grow mainly because of the leadership and decision making flexibility within its organs.
Dependent on the environment, flexibility in decision making process helps the organisations take advantage of the environment, hence competing well (Hands, 2011). To limit decision making flexibility, the organisations cannot achieve the desired change, and in some cases, it will not be able to meet the market expectations (Hands, 2011).
This will give other market players an upper hand, hence limiting the organisations profitability. Dependent on the environment, flexibility in decision making process helps the organisations take advantage of the environment, hence competing well (Hands, 2011).
To limit decision making flexibility, the organisations cannot achieve the desired change, and in some cases, it will not be able to meet the market expectations (Hands, 2011). This will give other market players an upper hand, hence limiting the organisations profitability.
Participative Theory
Participative theory accounts and appreciates others’ contribution. This theory gives chance to all to involve in the decision making process as well as provides an opportunity to model their area of operation (Northouse, 2010). This kind of leadership creates an effective organisationsal change in an organisation, whereby all the stakeholders express their views on various issues affecting the organisations (Goleman, 2002).
This helps the organisations leaders with wide range of information regarding various subjects make informative decision. Leaders who practice participation theory of leadership build a good relationship with all the stakeholders in the organization, whereby they find a chance to associate with the organisations growth and development (Rampur, n.d).
In case the leader fails to practice this kind of leadership, other stakeholders will find it difficult to associate with the organisation’s development, hence making it unrealistic to maintain. Marketing development department, for example, must be willing and able to adopt this strategy mainly because it enhances creativity and innovativeness (Jones, Jones & George 2011).
Holding the fact that the current business environment is changing, it is important for the organisations’ leaders to account for all the suggestions made by professionals within the departments (Rampur, n.d). This will help the organisations competitiveness be realistic and up to date. Failing to accommodate these, the organisations can not withstand various environmental changes (Finkelstein, 2009).
Management Theory
This kind of leadership is implemented in a competitive business environment where rewards and motivation are expected by the supporting staffs (Covey, 2004. P. 13). A leader in this scope ensures that results are delivered by the staffs with an intention to meet a specific goal. Although this kind of leadership can be said to be dictatorial, it is necessary when the leading figure is a result of the oriented person.
This kind of leadership ensures that his or her organisation meets the expected targets, maintaining a change in the organisations (Few, 2006). Most of the businesses that are managed by this kind of leadership are aimed at surviving all the environmental, and it is the responsibility of the leader to facilitate this transition.
For example, in the financial industry, leaders ensure that their organisations retain a good reputation in terms of both the effectiveness of the services as well as organisations profit motive agenda (Daft, 2011.p. 41).
It is the role of the leader to oversee this, so he or she must be willing to motivate the employees if their performance is poor. This ensures that all perform duties well, hence achieving effective organisationsal change (Daft, 2011.p. 41).
Relationship Theory
It is also known as a transformational theory where reflects the relationship between the leaders and the followers in an organisations is only reflected. This theory, if practiced in an organisation, helps to improve the relationship between the leaders and the followers (Daft, 2011.p. 41).
If the relationship between the two sides is profound, it then means that the organisations will have a good working relation, hence effectively transforming areas of challenges as a team (Covey, 2004). Teamwork is more embraced by this theory than by any other approach, and all the organisations members work as a team hence delivering more (Covey, 2004. P. 76).
A good example to demonstrate this contribution is a marketing department. All the stakeholders in this department must be willing and able to work as a team for the good of their result. One can perform the duty of this department alone. Creativity and innovativeness of the members are necessary for this department to get results (Covey, 2004. P. 12)..
Conclusion
Prudent leadership is the key of the organisationsal performance. A leader should be able to relate well with other stakeholders, be able to make decisions as well as manage and direct the others while meeting the organisations duties.
With all these leadership qualities, the leader has the capacity, therefore, to impact an organisationsal change in his or her organisations, irrespective of the environmental condition prevailing (Cini, 1999, p 23).
References
Cañas, KA, & Sondak, H 2011, Opportunities and challenges of workplace diversity: theory, cases, and exercises, 2nd ed, Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, N.J.
Cini, M 1996, The European Commission: leadership, organisation, and culture in the EU administration, Manchester University Press, Manchester.
Covey, SR 2004, The 7 habits of highly effective people: restoring the character ethic, Rev. edn, Free Press, New York.
Daft, RL & Lane, P G 2011, Leadership, 5th ed., International ed, South-Western Cengage Learning, Mason, Ohio.
Few, S 2006, Information dashboard design: the effective visual communication of data, O’Reilly, Beijing.
Finkelstein, S, Hambrick, DC, & Cannella, AA 2009, Strategic leadership: theory and research on executives, top management teams, and boards, Oxford University Press, New York.
Goleman, D, Boyatzis, RE, & McKee, A 2002, Primal leadership: realizing the power of emotional intelligence, Harvard Business School Press, Boston, Mass.
Hands, J 2011, @ is for activism: dissent, resistance and rebellion in a digital culture, Pluto, London.
Hill, CW, & Jones, GR 2009. Strategic management theory: an integrated approach, 9th ed, South-Western Cengage Learning, Mason, Ohio.
Jones, G., Jones, G. R., & George, J. M. 2011. Essentials of contemporary management, 4th ed, McGraw-Hill/Irwin, Boston.
Kouzes, JM, & Posner, BZ 2002, The leadership challenge, 3rd ed, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco.
Krajewski, LJ, Ritzman, LP, & Malhotra, MK 2010, Operations management: processes and supply chains, 9th ed, Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, N.J.
Larson, EW, & Gray, CF 2011, Project management: the managerial process, 5th ed, McGraw-Hill Irwin, New York.
Lencioni, P 2002, The five dysfunctions of a team: a leadership fable. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco.
Marquis, BL, & Huston, CJ 2009, Leadership roles and management functions in nursing: theory and application, 6th ed, Wolters Kluwer Health/Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, Philadelphia.
Morgan, G 2006, Images of organisations, Updated ed, Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks.
Nohria, N, & Khurana, R 2010, Handbook of leadership theory and practice: an HBS centennial colloquium on advancing leadership. Harvard Business Press, Boston, Mass.
Northouse, PG 2009, Introduction to leadership: concepts and practice, Sage Publications, Los Angeles.
Northouse, PG 2007, Leadership: theory and practice, 4th ed, Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks.
Northouse, P G 2010, Leadership: theory and practice, 5th ed, Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks.
Novick, LF, Morrow, CB, & Mays, GP 2008, Public health administration: principles for population-based management, 2nd ed, Jones and Bartlett Pub, Sudbury, Mass.
Sennett, R 2006, The culture of the new capitalism, Yale University Press, New Haven.
Tomey, A 2009, Guide to nursing management and leadership, 8th ed, Mosby Elsevier, St. Louis, Mo.
Yeo, RR 2001, Encyclopaedic visions: scientific dictionaries and enlightenment culture, University Cambridge Press, Cambridge.