Organistational Behaviour - Advice Paper (Essay Sample)

ORGANISATIONAL BEHAVIOUR - ADVICE PAPER
By Student Name
Instructor
Course
Date
This advice paper provides an evidence-based analysis for the CEO of MyCommuniCo to consider on how leadership amongst the company managers can be made as effective as possible within the company. The study will compare and contrast evaluates two critical studies on leadership, the first being authentic leadership by George (2007). According to George et al (2007), a leader cannot be a true one by just imitating what others have done in the past. This is because it would be difficult to gain the trust of followers by imitating the work or ideas of other leaders. The second model is the Bass transformational leadership theory. Bass model focuses on the extent to which leaders can influence their followers. The rational for choosing the two models of leadership is based on their potential to compliment the company’s efforts in a changing business environment. The mobile phone industry is experiencing rapid changes and therefore, the company must embrace a leadership approach that will keep it ahead of the competition. This paper will first explore what the author or authors of each study were trying to achieve and their overall findings. Secondly, the advice paper will critically evaluate how convincing are the authors’ claims concerning their findings. Based on this analysis, the paper will provide a set of recommendations for the CEO of MyComminiCo to consider adopting for effective leadership.
Exploration of the two Studies
Authentic or ideal leadership is something that most people would like to have or imitate. Indeed, it has taken many books and seminars to delve and try to understand how leadership can be nurtured in any environment. However, as the writers observe, none of the various methods are close to identifying what constitutes or comprises the ideal leader. In their article, “Discovering Authentic Leadership,” Bill George et al (2007), have tried to point out the various requirements of leaders who wish to climb successfully in the leadership ladder and leave a legacy without reinventing the wheel. The authors argue that people have tried to find an answer to the leadership issues that confront managers in many sectors for a long time. In addition, George et al (2007) have tried to show their readers how to develop the five dimensions of authentic leaders based on their leadership experiences. The five tenets of authentic leaderships include; purpose, values, heart relationships, and self discipline. At this point, the authors attempt to illustrate how genuine leaders can set themselves as outstanding lessons for others indeed, the authors persuasively articulate that authentic leaders are mission-driven in creating successful organizations. Within their investigative approach, the authors note that leaders are not born with unique characteristics or traits. In addition, they believe that leaders should not wait for opportunities to discover their potentials.
There are several approaches identified by the authors to help leaders became authentic. First, one should lay up their life stories in a way that they see themselves, not as passive observers of their lives, but as people who can develop self-awareness from their own experiences. Secondly, a person should have a well-grounded life to keep a strong support team in the pursuit of company ideals. George et al (2007) try to bring forward an argument on how leaders can interact and inspire their organizations to achieve growth. The leader can develop efficiency out of interaction with the company employees; hence, he/she will be acceptable to all because of the quality he or she exhibits. In addition, the writers posit that authentic leaders have a focus. They are people who are after certain missions and live within their values as they try to satisfy the needs of their stakeholders. George et al (2007), continue to say that, authentic companies should have a good governing system and more so, such organizations should invest in leadership succession for more generations. According to the article, passion drives people to succeed. In summary, the authors argue in favor of a new leader or fresh ideas. A leader who can be relied upon to provide solutions to the current socio-economic issues bedeviling the corporate world. In doing so, they trash the notion that outside forces can influence leadership. This paper will evaluate the argument of George et al (2007), and provide pros and cons on the arguments advanced.
On the other hand, Bass and Riggio (2006) extended the earlier work of Burns (1978) by providing the psychological basis of transforming and transactional leadership. Bass and Riggio coined the term ‘transformational’ in place of ‘transforming.’ In essence, Bass and Riggio added to the initial idea developed by Burns (1978) in an attempt to explain how transformational leadership could be evaluated. In addition, the researchers attempted to show how it affects followers in terms of their motivation and performance. According to Bass and Riggio (2006), the extent to which a leader can be said to be transformational depends on how they stimulate and inspire their followers to achieve above average outcomes (Tourish 2008). In transformational leadership (Bass and Riggio 2006)there are four major components that are critical in follower attainment which include, idealized influence, intellectual stimulation, individualized consideration and inspirational consideration (Bass 1997).Idealized influence is when the leader’s behavior is seen as a driving force in employee actions. The leader becomes a role model to the followers. In essence, followers wish to emulate the leader. Intellectual stimulation is what the leader provides to the leaders to enhance creativity an innovation among the followers (Bass 1997). Inspirational motivation deals with the followers need to realize meaning in what they do in the workplace. Finally, individualized consideration occurs when the leader behaves as the coach and mentor to the workers. In this context, the leader fulfils the employees need for growth and advancement in their career.
Evaluation of the two Models
The transformation theory uses several models that are incorporated to offer a plausible and coherent model for modern and complex firms. Huczynsky and Buchanan consider the model appropriate for the competitive environment. The writers state, “Rapidly changing competitive climate requires participative, visionary and inspirational style of leadership” (p. 79). Based on this argument, it can be said that the model has successfully risen above the challenges of an ever-changing corporate climate where “the new leadership concept draws together the main strands of twentieth century thinking” (Huczynsky and Buchanan, p. 102, Kotter 1990). According to Huczynsky and Buchanan, it is paramount that leadership be amenable to flexibility and unpredictable business environments. These scenarios are closely related with participative elements such as integrity and other ethical issues in leadership. Indeed, this is supported by Kotter’s highly influential arguments on leadership where he argues that it is paramount that emphasis be put on the leader’s ability to inspire other people to achieve organizational goals. However, there are critical concerns over the transformational theory (Hoyt & Blascovich 2003).
The transformational leadership model is too elitist and puts a lot of pressure on the heroic aspect of the leader at the expense of the followers (Tourish 2008). Implicit in this argument is the belief that transformational leaders are born with unique leadership capabilities that other people can never be endowed with or cannot access. Consequently, followers have no option but to follow the whims of the leader (Kotter 1990).
On the other hand, authentic leadership is a relatively new concept that tries to link personal values with how a person executes the leadership responsibilities. Different theorists view the concept in different dimensions. However, they all attest that awareness of the individual self and making the right decisions are in becoming an authentic leader. The key aspects of an authentic leader can be conceptualized into a model that connects the leaders’ thoughts with their actions. George et al (2007) have carefully directed and guided their readers who may wish to become leaders based on character and those who are stakeholders in the integrity and stake of our corporations. For those readers who are keen will note that, George et al, 2007 has laid down important approaches of answering questions on matters like, what to do incase of personal values conflicting with company business values, what to do incase of trade-offs with your customers, employees, and company shareholders’ needs. Authentic leadership has brought to us clearly lessons for leadership from his personal lifetime experience and a leader in medical technology company. The researchers conclude by arguing that for authentic leaders, rewards awaits them because whenever you lead people you achieve certain goals which is actually great pleasure especially when the results are long term and sustainable. However, the model is problematic for several reasons. Levy and Bantly (2007) argue that authentic leaders are true to themselves and act upon their beliefs for the common good. The theory of relativism contracts this notion, which argues that truth is a contestable concept.
In addition, becoming an authentic leader has been one of the most challenging issues in the 21st century. It is costly in terms of learning oneself. It might not be clear what one wants to achieve in the long term. Further, the model fails to take into account the complexities of gender and power. These problems a...