Post-bureaucratic leadership is ‘the process of controlling, motivating and inspiring staff’ (Clegg, Kornberger & Pitsis 2011, p. 126), whereas globalisation refers to ‘the increase in financial integration of economies around the world’ (Clegg, Kornberger & Pitsis 2011, p.612). As such the practice of leadership is an integral component in all aspects of an organization as it can determine the success or failure of a business. According to (Punnet 2004) ‘leadership is a key component of all organizations, but its ability and functions have become more difficult with the rise of globalisation during the post-bureaucratic era.’ This essay will examine how the various leadership approaches have contributed to managing globalisation and the effects …show more content…
The behavioural approach uses the assumption that leadership can be learned and focuses on observable behaviours to identify how leaders perform. Although Katz (1955) claimed that critical leadership skills included technical, human and conceptual skills whereas, Kurt, White and Lippit (1939) demonstrated that the Autocratic, Democratic and Laissez-faire leadership styles contributed negatively to globalisation and management. As previously stated globalisation has been a major key to economic growth and development, however MNC’s have become so large that leaders are accountable for thousands of people (Rego, Clegg & Cunha 2011). The implementation of the Autocratic, Democratic and Laissez-faire leadership styles has allowed multinational leaders to demonstrate control over their employees (Kurt, White & Lippit 1939) which is evident is Pilger’s (2003) study of developing countries. Through the autocratic leadership style, MNC leaders have exploited their power within third world countries such as Indonesia, by increasing their domination over thousands of employees and controlling their economy. By examining the effects of autocratic leadership practice and revealing its effects on globalisation it is evident that the behaviourial approach also contributed to the management of globalisation in post-bureaucratic methods, and is similar to that of the trait theory in the way leader misuse power and
The topic of leadership has been explored and written about by thousands of authors who are considerably more qualified than I am to write about the subject. However, I’ve always maintained that developing, evolving and articulating one’s own leadership philosophy is an essential part of a professional’s growth. Through academics and experience, I’ve concluded that leadership is a “soft” skill, more art than science, and that leadership principles can be universally applied. As a topic of discussion, leadership can be ambiguous and seldom does everyone agree on a single definition. Organizations and the people they consist of crave leadership, even if not overtly. Undeniably, strong leadership is essential to achieving
Leadership at times can be a complex topic to delve into and may appear to be a simple and graspable concept for a certain few. Leadership skills are not simply acquired through position, seniority, pay scale, or the amount of titles an individual holds but is a characteristic acquired or is an innate trait for the fortunate few who possess it. Leadership can be misconstrued with management; a manager “manages” the daily operations of a company’s work while a leader envisions, influences, and empowers the individuals around them.
Following this, I’ll contrast the argument by drawing upon Shackleton’s “leadership in the face of crisis” (Browning 2007 pg198) suggesting that the changes in practices within the post-bureaucratic era have “branched” and remained influenced by bureaucratic leadership styles (Grahn 2008). In section two, I discuss the changes in the “pedagogy” of leadership development through the practices of an organisation and how such courses transfer theoretical learning of leadership to a practical application (Herman 2007). Following this, I attempt to compare Meindi’s (1997) Article “the romance of leadership” considering the strong romanticised conception of leadership, being a strong part of social reality. In doing so exhibit, that bureaucracy has not been “suppressed” but rather ”refurbished”. Finally, within the conclusion I propose my views on bureaucracy being inherent within contemporary post-bureaucracy society, becoming a “hybrid” form as Clegg and Courpasson (2004)
Post-bureaucratic leadership differs from Max Weber’s and Henry Ford’s models of bureaucratic leadership as their form is focused on maximising production, through a formal hierarchical structure, and impersonal relationships with employees (Johnston, 2004). While bureaucratic leadership ultimately causes alienation, Post-bureaucratic leadership aims to remove this alienation and bridge the gulf between the “supreme leaders” and “lowly subordinates” (Gabriel,1997). Post-bureaucratic leadership not only aims for financial betterment, but also the betterment of employees, and society as a whole. This is referred to as Corporate Social Responsibility, which consists of environmental and social dimensions.
Leadership has been written about millions of times in the past, and heading in the future, it will be the topic of many debates, books and newspaper articles asking, and in some cases answering the question, “What is leadership?” According to Peter Drucker: “leadership is lifting a person’s vision, raising his performance and building personality”.
The principles of leadership and management are helps to understand the management style and make the effective decision. An effective decision helps to gain the success of an organization. Lots of way to manage and collect information/question for leadership and management which are describing in the below:
Leadership is not defined by position. Leadership is an extraordinary responsibility given only to those willing to exude selflessness, decisiveness, and wisdom. CSM William R. Hambrick, Jr is an accomplished leader that embodies the values, attributes, and competencies that I aspire to convey to my subordinates. The impact that CSM Hambrick has had on my career and leadership philosophy is immeasurable. His far-reaching legacy is one of confidence, sound judgment, and empathy.
“Leadership is an influence relationship among leaders and followers who intend real changes that reflect their mutual purposes” (Rost, 1931). But in today’s time, the styles of leadership are changed every time a new technology is invented or discovered so there is lack of persistency. The only thing which manages to stay constant is the principles of carrying out business activities. There are philosophies and ideologies on leadership which can be used in any time period as they are mostly a reflection of the principles of leadership. Theorists and authors like Hobbes (1679), Lewin (1947) and Aristotle (384–322 B.C.), in their time have produced enough material which can be put into use by modern day leaders and managers. Philosophers like Aristotle, who was known to be one of the most business-oriented and practical philosopher of his time, his work is still used by businesses today because of their relevance as he is interested in defining principles in terms of the ethics of leadership (Santa Clara University). In the essay I have tried to show how leadership has adapted to the changes around them and compared to the past and what circumstances caused need to change it. As a layman, anyone would think that the principles centuries ago will be very different to what we follow now but after studying on Hobbes, Lewin and Aristotle it has made a big impact on my way of thinking because the work produced by them still has more relevance compared to some of the work produced now. I have tried to explain the evolvement of leadership through three aspects which are psychology, sociology and philosophy.
As we all know, leadership is very important. However, its effects are not always visible. In crises, high quality leadership tends to be both visible and decisive for a positive outcome. Leadership requirements and expectations change over time, responsibilities and roles must be review at regular intervals. In all nations and countries today, good leadership is important on day-to-day bases. Leadership involves working together with employees, their organizations and other parties to achieve results. Most leadership functions and roles vary according to level, framework conditions, and type of responsibility, competence requirements, and degree of autonomy. After doing research we have come to realize that different cultures have different leadership styles. They have their similarities and differences but this only makes them stronger as a whole. We have taken the time to do research on both the U.S. and Norway leadership styles. Norway seems to share many of its administrative and leadership values with other countries.
House et al. (2007) discovers that leadership and Organisational culture are closely linked together as leaders influence the culture of their organisations. Researches talk about a range of leadership definitions but it is not easy to define. (E.g. Western, 2008; Yukl, 2010). However, Cohen (2009) critically analyses definitions from Dracker (1996), Eisenhower (1969), Northouse (2004) and finally summarised the definition of leadership constitutes five elements. First of all, ask question to set direction, which means effective leaders need to listen to followers’ voice respectfully and then share the common goals and ideas with them. In addition, leaders need to seek insights and allocate resources optimally; act ethically; allow their employees to work in a conformable and most effective way. This essay will explain different leadership styles and how they influence the organisations with examples of organisations and leaders with main focus on well-known entrepreneur: Sir Alan Sugar. He grows from nothing to incredible success (£ 730 million), is a legend in the UK business history; his reality TV show “The Apprentice”, a great entertainment for recruitment appeals to the public without reasons. However, he as a person is controversial amongst people, probably due to his leadership style as bullying or harassment (destructive). There are four schools of leadership styles: Trait, behavioural, contingency and transformational. Nevertheless, in the case of Alan Sugar, trait and transactional styles match him which will be illustrated following in detail.
As many organisational theorists have acknowledged the impact leaderships possess, there have been many debates over
Leadership is a function of personal and professional qualities (retrospection), the conception of a vision, structure and satisfying a sense of collective purpose, and make sure carrying out, with strategy and culture as two situational or contextual factors (cannon,2004; gil,2006)
In today’s complex management environment, I believe that the mindset of a manger weigh the same as their views and attitude on the job. Certainly, Jonathan Gosling an established scholar and the director of the Centre for Leadership Studies at the University of Exeter provide an excellent view on the diverse talent requirements in effective management. The main issue identified by the author is the connection between leadership and management. Separation of management and leadership is impractical. However not all good leaders are good managers and vice versa. Gosling, and Mintzberg (2003), argues that management without leadership promotes uninspired behavior, which hinders business activities. On the other hand, leadership devoid of management results in disconnect of actions and ideas. I concur with the author’s argument on the relationship between management and leadership. I believe that good managers should be good leaders too. However, most organizations do not enjoy both the benefits of effective leadership and management. In particular, most organizations lack either of these ...
Because of this fact most organizations and entrepreneurs are paying close attention the the leaders they put in place to lead their company and its people into victory, which is the ultimate goal of their organizations. It is a well known fact that leadership is an important factor in an organization’s success, but the type of leadership style and as well as the leader 's personality is what really determines that level of success. In my research I have concluded that the most important leadership styles are transformational and transactional leadership. Transformational leadership has the potential to resurrect, transform and keep companies evolving with time. Transactional leadership although can have some negative effects on some, but if used properly, can promote compliance almost a stagnant team through both rewards and punishments. When companies are pursuing leaders, they not only look at their candidates experiences knowledge of a particular sector of that business, but they pay close attention to the personalities of these individual. They do so because they know that one’s leadership style and abilities is heavily affected by the candidates own personality and views. As a result of this thinking, it has lead all authors involved in both research paper and article “Relationship Between Leaders Personality Types and Source of Power and leadership Styles Among Managers” and “
Leadership, without doubt, is a significantly important function of management. It helps to aggrandize efficiency and to fulfil an organization’s goals. Leadership is the ability of a manager to induce the subordinates to work with confidence, determination, courage and zeal. It is also defined as ability to influence a group towards the realization of a goal. Leaders should have the capability of developing future visions, and to drive the organizational members to want to attain the visions. This paper states my points in which I duly believe, justifies the importance of an outstanding leader in any organization.