Introduction
Five years ago, I worked as a supervisor at a motor company. One day, subordinates told me they were being harassed sexually by a coworker. The accused harasser is a highly effective worker with the respect and likeability of many others in the company. As a result, I was aware that disciplining them would not be popular and could even damage my reputation; however, I was also aware that doing nothing might have major repercussions for the victim and the organization.
Context
The problem appears in the light of the #MeToo movement and the heightened focus on harassment at work. I had the dilemma of balancing the demands of the business and the expectations of my coworkers if I wanted to provide a safe and courteous workplace. This conundrum contrasts the desire to stay popular among coworkers with the necessity to make difficult choices that put employee safety and the reputation of the company first.
The employee who informed me of the harassment appears frightened and has voiced their worries concerning the harasser’s actions against them. My duty as a supervisor was to intervene, look into the claims, and defend the victim. I knew the harasser was a great employee who had made a significant contribution to the company’s accomplishments. I was concerned that dismissing them may lower team morale, damage the team’s reputation, and perhaps have legal ramifications.
Also, I was worried about other coworkers’ reaction to my choice, particularly those who got along well with the accused harasser. Although I knew ignoring the problem was not an alternative, I was reluctant to come out as unjust. The advantages of retaining my popularity must be weighed alongside the costs of ignoring workplace harassment, including possible damage to my organization’s image and legal standing.
The Contingency Theory of Leadership
The contingency leadership theory states that a leader’s efficacy depends on the circumstances. This idea indicates that there is no one-size-fits-all approach to management, suggesting instead, the most effective leadership style relies on situational conditions (Lartey, 2020, p. 44). This idea states that the best leadership approach accommodates the demands of the circumstance.
In this theory, three factors establish the ideal leadership style: Leader-member connections, which are the measure of trust, respect, and conviction that members have in their leader. The degree to which tasks are specified and organized is called organizational identification (Michaelsen et al., 1993, p.127). Position power is the level of official authority and resource control a leader possesses.
The contingency theory of leadership is one theory from the management discipline of power, influence, & politics that may address the abovementioned problem. According to the Contingency theory of leadership, no one leadership style exists that works for all situations (Lartey, 2020, p. 44). Thus, modifying an individual’s leadership approach is crucial depending on the circumstances and the individuals you are working with.
Using the theory’s situational approach, the manager may find a solution to the predicament. In particular, this can evaluate the circumstances to decide what kind of leadership approach would better handle sexual harassment claims. For instance, if the boss judges that the claimed harasser is very competent and prominent, whereby it implements a participatory leadership style that entails bargaining with the harasser to come to a settlement that is advantageous to all parties. However, if the manager believes the claims are serious and calls for immediate action, they could embrace an authoritative leadership style, acting quickly to defend the victim and stop the harassment (Lartey, 2020, p. 44). The supervisor can resolve the problem in the most advantageous way for all parties by utilizing the contingency theory of leadership to analyze the issue and identify the best leadership style.
To implement the contingency theory of leadership in my dilemma, I should evaluate the setting and choose the best leadership approach depending on the circumstances. As a result, I must first investigate the charges and acquire proof to learn more about the scenario. I can choose the best leadership style depending on the accusations’ seriousness and the evidence acquired.
A directive leadership style could be required if the situation is critical and urgent action is needed to safeguard the victim and stop the harassment (McAdam, Miller, and McSorley, 2019). I must make a firm decision that is done according to the Three ethical criteria of the Ethics of power and politics (utilitarian outcomes, individual rights, and distributive justice) (People and Organisations Week 8– Power & Politics, 2015, p. 41). This strategy puts the image of the company and the safety of its employees ahead of the desire to continue enjoying good standing among coworkers.
A collaborative leadership style could be better suited if the issue is less dire. To acquire more information and work towards an agreeable settlement for all parties, I might respectfully and openly interact with the parties involved. This strategy shows a dedication to establishing a secure and courteous workplace while considering the requirements and expectations of coworkers. In each scenario, I must ensure everyone understands their choice and rationale (McAdam, Miller, and McSorley, 2019, p.195). The manager may balance the demands of the organization and their coworkers while putting the reputation of the company and the safety of their staff first by using the leadership style most suited for the given circumstance.
Strategies to Solve the Dilemma
Collecting information essential before utilizing the following strategies is an important first step. This may entail investigating the problem, speaking with those who have encountered identical circumstances, or seeking professional advice. Consulting dependable relatives, friends, or coworkers might be beneficial. This might give you a different viewpoint and make you decide more wisely.
After gathering information, assessing the scenario to identify the problem’s causes is crucial. This might assist me in identifying viable solutions and evaluating their efficacy. On the other hand, I must think about options and list probable answers or choices. To choose the most practical and successful solution, weigh the advantages and disadvantages of each.
First Strategy
To handle workplace harassment, create explicit policies and processes. Establishing clear rules and processes for handling such situations is one evidence-based technique for tackling the problem of workplace harassment. Employees will comprehend what to do if they encounter or witness harassment if there is a clear framework for dealing with it. Furthermore, by having these rules and processes in place, the company will be able to respond to claims of discrimination more successfully (Dinibutun, 2020). This tactic is backed by the contingency model of leadership, which underlines adjusting one’s leadership approach to the circumstances and the stakeholders.
I can adopt a more authoritative leadership style by developing explicit policies and processes for dealing with workplace harassment, which is useful when prompt action is required to resolve a situation. I may put this plan into action by working with HR to develop a policy that explains in detail how to report and deal with workplace harassment (Poulfelt et al., 2021, p.3). Whether to report an occurrence, how the company will look into claims of harassment, and what steps will be taken if harassment is proven must all be covered in the policy. Whenever the policy exists, the supervisor must convey it unambiguously to all workers and give training on that policy and its application.
Second Strategy
I should develop an environment of respect and responsibility. Fostering a culture of respect and commitment is another evidence-based method for addressing the problem of workplace harassment. The danger of workplace harassment can be decreased by fostering an environment where all employees are respected and held accountable for their behavior (Rabie and Malek, 2020, p.73). This tactic is supported by the social learning hypothesis, which contends that people pick up behavior from others surrounding them. I can urge their team members to act politely and responsibly by setting an example. I should implement this strategy by collaborating with HR to create a training program that focuses on creating an atmosphere of accountability and respect.
Subjects, such as defining harassment, how to submit an occurrence, and the repercussions of engaging in harassing behavior, should be included in the training. Also, the supervisor may provide an example of polite conduct in their contact with staff members and take responsibility for their and others’ disrespectful behaviors. By putting these tactics into practice, the manager may establish a secure and respected workplace where the reputation of the company and the employee’s safety and health come first (Pahl-Wostl et al., 2020, p.23). These tactics are supported by the contingency theory of leadership and the social learning theory because they emphasize tailoring leadership approaches to the circumstances and the individuals involved and setting an example for others to follow to inspire positive behavior change in themselves.
Conclusion
The conundrum of workplace harassment presents an enormous obstacle for supervisors who should balance the necessity of upholding reputation and goodwill among peers and giving the well-being of employees and the reputation of the company top priority. By highlighting the significance of tailoring leadership approaches to the demands of the circumstance and the participants, the contingency theory of leadership offers a framework for tackling this difficulty.
Reference List
Dinibutun, S. R. (2020) ‘Leadership: a comprehensive review of literature, research and theoretical framework’, Journal of Economics and Business, 3(1), pp. 44-64. Web.
Lartey, F. (2020) ‘Chaos, complexity, and contingency theories: a comparative analysis and application to the 21st century organization’, Journal of Business Administration Research, 9(1), pp. 44-51. Web.
McAdam, R., Miller, K., and McSorley, C. (2019) ‘Towards a contingency theory perspective of quality management in enabling strategic alignment’, International Journal of Production Economics, 207, pp. 195-209. Web.
Michaelsen, L. K., Jones, C. F. and Watson, W. E. (1993) ‘Beyond groups and cooperation: building high performance learning teams’, To improve the academy, 12(1), pp.127-145. Web.
Pahl-Wostl, Claudia, et al. (2020) ‘Enhancing the capacity of water governance to deal with complex management challenges: a framework of analysis’, Environmental Science & Policy, 107, pp. 23-35. Web.
Poulfelt, F., et al. (2021) ‘On the particular challenges of managing professionals,’ How to Lead Academic Departments Successfully. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing, pp. 3-13.
Rabie, M. O., and Malek, M. A. (2020). ‘Ethical leadership and employee ethical behavior: a moderated mediation mechanisms’, SEISENSE Journal of Management, 3(2), pp.73-88. Web.
‘People and Organisations Week 8– Power & Politics’ (2015) [PowerPoint presentation]. COMMGMT 7006. Web.
Loading...
