Studying the role of leadership management

Studying the role of star(p) managementAccording to Bennis and Nanus (1985, p. 20), drawship is referred as the most studied and least understood return of any in the social sciences. There argon more than than 100 definitions of leading having been identified in literature (Rost, 1991), and Stogdill (1974) even suggests that the definitions of leadership argon as many as flock who impart ever tried to define it. However, on that point is neither any unanimously accepted definition of leadership, nor any consensus on the best way to train leaders (Bolden, 2004). Gallie (1955, cited in Grint, 2004, p. 1) defines leadership as, leadership appears to be, like berth, an essentially contend concept, whereas Bennis and Nanus (1985, p. 20) describes leadership as the abominable snowman, whose footprints atomic number 18 eachwhere but who is nowhere to be seen. To summarise, the meaning of leadership is complex and includes many dimensions and it addresses many other light upon business/corporate, organisational, socio- heathen and individualised processes. In innovationale days, it is generally popularised among commentators that personal magnetism, inspiration, cuss and consensus have been increasingly associated with leadership, but the author tends to advise they atomic number 18 necessary conditions for undefeated leadership in most situations, and there are circumstances, where other determinants are needed.Various Schools of Thoughts about contemporaneous leadIn 21st century the concepts of leadership and its definition are becoming more diversify according to various take aims of thoughts. Peters (1993, p.19), explains the contemporary leadership as, Crucial to the revolution now under way so crucial that we believe the words managing and management should be discarded. Drucker (1992, p.119), having a similar point as Peters, identifies ripe-day leadership as, Mundane, unromantic and boring. Its essence is performance, though Bol den (2004) is non in the favour of diametriciating the details of the leadership from the management. What is more, as noted in the Jack Welchs example, General Electric Company progresses many folds in few days and the basis of this victor is a candid, lucid and set guideline for a linear and prolific organisation (Slater, 2003). Last but not least, Peter Scholtes (1998) leadership concentrates on systems view, and his opinions include preeminent by objectives, chastity pay, performance appraisals, motivation, etc. According to Collinson (2005), followinghip is the essence of leadership, which means that modern-day leadership vogues should be according to the personality and characteristics of the following. The author understands from these different views that in the 21st century leadership bearings, there is no wiz flavor slight leading drift in the organizations.Charisma in contemporaneous leadingCharisma is an advantage that promotes modern-day leadership perfo rmances, but it is not essential (Carpenter, 2002). Max Weber (1947) firstly defines that charisma differing leaders from banausic masses refers to special gifted magnetic charm and appeal it gives leaders the capacity to do erratic things, and in particular it gives the leader exceptional powers of influence to accomplices. Scholars further suggest that magnetized leaders a great deal serve as a slopped role model for values that they desire others to adopt, show competency in every aspect of leadership so others swan his or her ratiocinations, articulate clear goals and strong values, communicate high expectations for chase and show assumption in their abilities to meet those expectations (Conger, 1989 House, 1977 Shamir et al., 1993). Charismatic leaders are having deep impact on pursual value, attitude and behavior, and it is suggested charisma is an important leadership attribute that motivates followers (Ilies et al., 2006). Leaders with charismatic personalitie s can get things done through attracting the subordinates to achieve the organisational goals more effectively, as people feel advance to be more devoted to their institute, as a result of their admiration and honor to their leaders (Mortensen, 2008). Bill Clinton and Steve Jobs are both typical charismatic leaders. With overwhelming personal charm and vision, they successfully create their era. However, Ciulla (2004) suggests that basis of the leadership is ethics like earned commit not the charm. Tyler (2008) also advises people are lead because of their trust to the leaders, not charisma. Furthermore, it is generally agreed that leadership is ability and a acquisition which could be learnt over time and with the experience and maturity (Mumford et al., 2000) leaders are made not born, and charisma could be developed (Adair, 2005). Yet, Howell and Shamir (2005) also figure out that characteristics of followers sometimes determine the efficiency of charismatic leadership. Ther e is no denying of the importance of charisma for the leaders in the present-day leadership styles. Charisma is the potency to project the vision and thoughts regarding what the future prospects will hold upon others to bring a positive transform or change. In the light of this discussion, author understands that charisma is increasingly associated with modern-day leadership, and with the concern of other factors like the fragment of trust and follower, leadership in the modern-day organisations becomes more effective.The Inspirational Approach in Modern-day LeadershipInspirational leaders could positively motivate and influence people to get the best out ofthemselves, and accordingly pursue a far better performance of the organization (Wilson,2010). Wilson and Rice (2004) also state that sacred leaders are able to encourage, grow, and ground up confidence of followers, through which modern organizations could benefit high performance, even facing adversity. Robbins et al. (20 10) suggest that charismatic leadership is the most common style of inspirational mount to leadership. The most striking atom of the charismatic leadership is the ability to inspire astonishing performance from the followers and the group. It is also revealed that inspiration is a tactic to influence others and is associated with the research conducted by Yukl and Falbe (1990). The concept is that the leader makes a request or proposal that arouses enthusiasm by appealing to peoples values, ideals and aspirations or by increasing their confidence that they can do it. However, leaders are starting to inspire and motivate followers to perform, once trust is built up (Zeffane, 2010). Scholars claims that there are factors stimulating inspiration, like a vision, which tells followers what they are judge to achieve and which they could always hold on (Scott, 2010). Other factors include involvement of everyone (Bilchik, 2001 Wilson, 2010), and the courage to admit personal weakness ( Goffee and Jones, 2000) and so forth. Yukl and Falbe (1990) also conclude that leaders are most likely to use inspirational appeal and pressure when trying to influence subordinates, rather than their boss, or colleagues. In short, people are godlike to enthusiastically perform as well as they could, and ultimately succeed in achieving better organisational performance.Consensus and Modern-day LeadershipWith more and more emphasis on democracy, modern-day leadership is being increasingly associated with the consensus element in the decision devising in the business organizations. Early experiments and research of Lewin et al. (1939) indicates that people are playacting better, if they have been involved in the decision-making process. They also suggest leadership style to a large tip determine the performance of the group and they have categorized leadership into three styles authoritarian, elected and laissez faire leadership, among which democratic leadership is generally reg arded as the more effective style. Consensus plays a very important role in democratic leadership, as members are encourage to participate in the decision-making process and involved in the final decision and the agreement (Knight et al., 1999). Hence, with the support to the decision, people are better motivated and likely to perform better that they have been expected to (Brilhart and Galanes, 1989). Moreover, consensus in leadership stimulates team cohesiveness, with which members cooperate more with each other (Sanders and Schyns, 2006). It is also state effective strategic leaders understand the necessity to involve team members in consensus decision making (Brilhart and Galanes, 1989). Besides, Felfe and Heinitz (2010) conclude that consensus not only largely predicts members consignments and their satisfaction, but also enhance organisational performance and leadership. Yet, Frisch (2008) argues a team bank make effective decisions if its members dont trust one another or if they fail to listen to one another. Therefore, before adopting consensus decision-making process, it is important that trust has been built up among members. It should not be neglected the decision-making ability of members in consensus process, as well as the fact that there are times authoritarian leaders work more effectively, especially facing risks and opportunities, as at least authoritarian leadership is far less time-consuming (Lewin et al., 1939), and not everyone has the ability to tell and seize opportunities. Steve Jobs to some degree is an authoritarian leader, as no matter what other say and do, he insists that Apple should do its software and hardware all by itself even in such an open world day, as they know themselves best. It appears that Steve Jobs and his way is the path to the success of Apple. It would still appear consensus in modern-day leadership attend tos to sustain decisions, and to succeed a strategic leader needs to build the consensus. self-assert ion Element in Modern-day LeadershipAs previously discussed, trust is shown as the basis of no matter charismatic,consensus or inspirational leadership. The importance of trust in modern organizations is widely recognized (Clegg et al., 2002), and it is increasingly important for leaders to arouse trust and faith to motivate the followers in modern organizations (Robbins et al., 2010). Martin (1998) defines trust leadership as, Leadership that is born and kept alive by the follower trust is trust leadership. According to him, followers attitudes are created by the leaders in the modern-day organisations. This allows the followers to trust the leader and trust is at the root of the leadership. Leadership is meant very little without the trust and offense versa. George Washington, Abraham Lincoln, Martin Luther King Jr. are some of the examples from the recent history who have innate abilities to influence the followers by appealing to their values and earning the trust. These values include trust, respect, equality and freedom and are present in the modern-day followers, too. The values practiced in the past can be duplicated and practiced today and employ to the workplaces (Martin, 1998). Attitudes determine responses, so effective leaders understand that employees attitudes are very important in achieving goals of the company. To build the trust, leaders influence employees by tapping into their values and thus a positive behavior and attitude is encouraged in both the leader and the follower. Thus, as Matthews (2010) suggests that trust is the basis to heighten and achieve productivity and positiveness in modern-day businesses in addition to aligning the organisational values with the employees values. Vadell (2008) also describes the trust as the leading concept in the organisational commitment, which could be exemplified by his research about United States Air Force Officers commitment and intention to leave the military. On the other hand, leaders trus t in subordinates benefits themselves in delegating power to subordinates (Leana, 1986), by which subordinates would be further motivated. Likewise, Greenberg (2009) indicates innovation more than often comes from taking risks, slice trust is key determinant to inspire people to take risks for example, Google employees are trusted to have one day a week to do whatever interests them, which gives birth to innovations like Gmail. The author understands that in the modern-day organisations and leadership styles, common trust surrounded by leaders and subordinates helps develop the commitment among the followers and this commitment element establish the verity of the charismatic leadership style.Increasing Association of Charisma, Trust, Inspiration and Consensus with the Modern-day Leadership TheoriesLiterature reveals charisma, trust, inspiration and consensus are all important factors of transformational leadership, which elevate followers well-being (Gillespie and Mann, 2004 Kha tri, 2005 Nielsen and Munir, 2009 Liu et al., 2010 Felfe and Heinitz, 2010). Bass (1985) suggests that transformational leadership theory results into growth and dominance of the followers, and Howell (1988) believes transformational leadership style develops dependency among the followers on the leader. This means that followers motivation, self respect and give attention all are dependent on the positive feedback and recognition from the leader. Richard Branson could well exemplify modern-day transformational leadership. In Virgin empire the individual personality of Branson is stamped all through the organization, and his values and goals derive and infuse every corner of the corporation. Charismatic transformational leaders like Branson are capable to achieve their impact by the foundation garment of followers who personally identify with this style as well as with the work group they are with (Yukl, 1989). Conger and Kanungo (1998) suggest that the personal attachment and id entification with the leaders is because of leaders charismatic style and start out and is based on referent power. Similarly, Shamir et al. (1993) suggest that role model behaviour is one primary(prenominal) mode with which leaders influence the followers. The older leadership styles such as contingency models of Fiedler (1967), Vroom and Yetton (1973) and Yukl (1989) have main focus on the identification of the leadership styles which predicts effective results depending on situational contingencies. But these theories could not advise for a continuous changing environment and circumstances.One of concepts recognised by most scholars as accurately reflecting what it is to be a leader is leadership is a trait (Rost, 1991). Stogdill (1974) studied some leadership qualities in traits that appeared more often than others, like sense of responsibility, self-confidence and emphasis on task competition. However, Shaw (1976) and Fraser (1978) identifies that leaders usually accomplish above average scores for the traits like motivation, ability and sociability. Rost (1991) suggests that according to the trait theory people are either born or not born with the leadership qualities that help them succeed in the leading roles. Inherited qualities for example the personality and cognitive ability are basis of the effective leadership. Author feels that sometimes traits are built or developed within the leaders. Richard Branson was not very sociable in his initiate life, but he has made himself the face of Virgin Group by participating in the stately promotional and publicity stunts to gain attention. Therefore, personality and traits are core part of modern-day leadership, but concurrence to needs and wants of the business become the more rife drivers of the behavior. Modern-day leadership styles are more associated with the meld of charisma and trust to inspire the followers.Influence of Cultural Differences on Modern-day LeadershipIn modern days, more and more researches are focused on leaders/leadership in the context of globoseization, that is global leaders/leadership (Mendenhall et al., 2008). It is also indicated despite of being a good leader in seat country, one of the biggest challenges facing modern global leaders is how to lead people cross-culturally (Thomas, 2008 Deresky, 2011), as one leadership style may be effective in one floriculture, but fails in another (Scandura and Dorfman, 2004). DeGrosky (2011) reveals that leadership theory and practice have a great impact and are influenced by the differences among the cultures. However, the basic or fundamental principles of the leadership are same in all cultures even if leaders execute those functions in diverse ways from culture to culture. People influence others through leadership. Peoples values, attitudes, beliefs and behaviours vary largely by culture (Hofstede, 1998 Walumbwa et al., 2007 Thomas, 2008), so efficiency of leadership influence differs by cultures, too. I n some cultures, people could be influenced successfully by applying coherent persuasion teamwork and consultation, while other cultures may be influenced successfully by exploitation general approaches like socialising, gifting and exerting pressure (DeGrosky, 2011). For example, as Americans have an individualistic cultural style (Hofstede, 1983), in this cultural context, leadership looks more at individual leaders and personality traits, style, behavior, as well as charisma, and it is encouraged to highlight individual success While in China, with a highly collectivism context, it is more rational to praise a team/group, instead of individuals. The case of the Floundering Expatriate also indicates that different leadership style is required by different cultural context. In modern-day leadership, peoples views of effectual leadership change from prevalent and individualistic toward collective and collaborative styles. The spheric Leadership and Organisational Behavior Effect iveness project in 2004 indentifies there are universally accepted leadership characteristics worldwide. Positive leader attributes include trustworthiness, justice, confidence, honesty and so forth, while loner, non-cooperation, ruthlessness and asociality etc. are negative attributes (House et al., 2004).ConclusionConcept of modern-day leadership differs from one school of thought to other like modern-day leadership styles include simple linear, visionary, pure arts and science, systems thinking and military style, etc. However, in modern-day leadership there is no single leading style among the leaders and in the organisations. Type of the organization and followers characteristics also play an important role in deciding for the leadership style now. But the key point is that modern-day leadership is increasingly associated with charisma, inspiration, trust and consensus, as well as other determinants like followers characteristics and cultural differences. However, charisma is c riticised in a positive as well as in a negative manner by different school of thoughts. When charismatic leadership style is based on the core values like paying respect and attention to the ideas of subordinates, then this brings a positive synergism for the impact of charismatic leadership style in the success of the business processes and operations. Trust between leaders and the followers is the basis for success of charismatic leadership style. Strategic leaders and policy makers with inspirational abilities and consensus development attitudes can develop trust between them and the followers/employees. In short, charisma, inspiration and trust are linked with each other and collectively help develop commitment among the followers.Reference ListAdair, J. (2005) The Inspirational Leader How to Motivate, Encourage and Achieve Success. Philadelphia Kogan Page.Bass, B.M. (1985) Leadership and death penalty beyond Expectation. natural York Free Press.Bennis, W. and Nanus, B. (1985 ) Leaders the Strategies for Taking Charge. New York Harper and Row.Bilchik, G.S. (2001) Leaders who inspire, Health meeting place Journal, Vol. 44, no 2, pp. 10-15.Bolden, R. (2004) What is Leadership? Online. Exeter Centre for Leadership Studies, Business School, University of Exeter. Retrieved from http//centres.exeter.ac.uk/cls/documents/what_is_leadership.pdf Accessed 17 December 2010.Brilhart, J. K. and Galanes, G. J. (1989) Effective Group Discussion. sixth ed. Dubuque William C. Brown.Carpenter, L. (2002) Inspirational leadership, management Services, Vol. 46, no 10, pp. 34-36.Ciulla, J.B. (2004) Ethics, the Heart of Leadership. 2nd ed. Westport Praeger.Clegg, C., Unsworth, K., Epitropaki, O. and Parker, G. (2002) Implicating trust in the innovation process, Journal of organizational and Occupational Psychology, Vol. 75, No. 4, pp. 409-422.Conger, J. A. (1989) The Charismatic Leader Behind the Mystique of Exceptional Leadership. 1st ed. San Francisco Jossey-Bass.Conger, J. A. and Kanungo, R. N. (1998) The empowerment process integration theory and practice, Academy of Management Review, Vol.13, No. 3, pp. 471-482.Collinson, D. (2005) Dialectics of leadership, Human Relations, Vol. 58, No. 11, pp. 1419-1442.DeGrosky, M. (2011) Cultural Context Leadership Online. Wildfire Magazine. Retrieved from http//wildfiremag.com/ leave out/cultural-context-leadership-200907/ Accessed 30 December 2011.Deresky, H. (2011) world(prenominal) Management Managing across Borders and Cultures. 7th Edition. Boston, London Pearson.Drucker, P. F. (1992) Managing for the Future The 1990s and Beyond. New York E.P. Dutton.Felfe, J. and Heinitz, K. (2010) The impact of consensus and agreement of leadership perceptions on commitment, organizational Citizenship Behaviour, and customer satisfaction, European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, Vol. 19, No. 3, pp. 279-303.Fiedler, F. (1967) A Theory of Leadership Effectiveness. New York McGraw-Hill.Fraser, C. (1978) undersized Groups Structure and Leadership. In H. Tajfel and C. Fraser (eds.), Introducing Social Psychology, Harmondsworth Penguin. Pp. 176-200.Frisch, B. (2008) When teams cant decide, Harvard Business Review, Vol. 86, No. 11, pp. 121-126.Goffee, R. and Jones, G. (2000) Why should anyone be led by you?, Harvard Business Review, Vol. 78, No. 5, pp. 62-70.Greenberg, D. (2009) Inspirational leadership, Leadership Excellence, Vol. 26, No. 12, pp. 9-10.Gillespie, N.A. and Mann, L. (2004) Transformational leadership and shared values the building blocks of trust, Journal of Managerial Psychology, Vol. 19, No. 6, pp. 588-607.Grint, K. (2004) What is leadership? From serpent to hybrid. Paper presented at the EIASM Workshop on Leadership Research, Sad Business School and Templeton College, Oxford, December.Hofstede, G. (1983) Dimensions of National Cultures in Fifty Countries and Three Regions. In J.B. Deregowski, S. Dziurawiec and R.C. Annis (eds.) Explications in Cross-cultural Psychol ogy. Lisse Swets Zeitlinger. pp. 335-355.Hofstede, G. (1998) A case for comparing apples with oranges-International differences in values, International Journal of Comparative Sociology, Vol. 39, No. 1, pp. 16-31.House, R. J. (1977) A 1976 Theory of Charismatic Leadership. In J. G. Hunt and L. L. Larson (Eds.), Leadership, the Cutting process A Symposium Held at Southern Illinois University, Carbondale, October 27-28, 1976. Carbondale Southern Illinois University Press. pp. 68-81.House, R.J., Hanges, P. J., Javidan, M. Dorfman, P.W. and Gupta, V. (eds.), (2004) Culture, Leadership and Organisations The GLOBE Study of 62 Societies. Thousand Okas Sage.Howell, J. M. (1988) cardinal Faces of Charisma Socialised and Personalised Leadership in Organisations. In J. A. Conger and R.N. Kanungo (eds), Charismatic Leadership. San Francisco Hossey Bass. Pp. 213-266.Howell, J.M. and Shamir, B. (2005) The role of followers in the charismatic leadership process Relationships and their consequen ces, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 30, No. 1, pp. 96-112.Ilies, R., Judge, T. A. and Wagner, D. T. (2006). Making sense of motivational leadership The trail from transformational leaders to motivated followers, Journal of Leadership and Organizational Studies, Vol. 3, No. 1, pp. 1-22.Leana, C.R. (1986) Predictors and consequences of delegation, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 29, No. 4, pp.754-774.Lewin, K., Lippitt, R. and White, R. (1939) Patterns of aggressive behavior in experimentally created social climates, Journal of Social Psychology, Vol. 10, No. 1, pp. 271-299.Liu, J., Sui, O.L. and Shi, K. (2010) Transformational Leadership and Employee Well-Being The Mediating Role of Trust in the Leader and Self-Efficacy, utilize Psychology An International Review, Vol. 59, No. 3, pp. 454-479.Khatri, N. (2005) An utility(a) model of transformational leadership, Vision, Vol. 9, No. 2, pp.19-26.Knight, D., Pearce, C.L., Smith, K.G., Olian, J.D., Sims, H.P., Smith, K.A. and Flo od, P. (1999) Top management team diversity, group processes and strategic consensus, Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 20, No.5, pp. 445-465.Martin, M.M. (1998) Trust Leadership, Journal of Leadership Studies, Vol. 5, No. 3, pp. 41-49.Matthews, D.J. (2010) Trust me Credible leadership delivers results, Chief Learning Officer, Vol. 9, No. 2, pp. 28-31.Mendenhall, M.E., Osland, J.S., Bird, A., Oddou, G.R. and Maznevski, M.L. (2008) Global Leadership. New York Routledge.Mortensen, K. (2008) Charisma power, Leadership Excellence, Vol. 25, No. 10, p.18.Mumford, M.D., Marks, M.A., Connelly, M.S., Zaccaro, S.J. and Palmon, R.R. (2000) Development of leadership skills Experience and timing, The Leadership Quarterly, Vol. 11, No. 1, pp. 87-114.Nielsen, K. and Munir, F. (2009) How do transformational leaders influence followers affective well-being? Exploring the mediating role of self-efficacy, Work and Stress, Vol. 23, No. 4, pp. 313-329.Peters, T. J. (1993) In pursuit of Excellence Less ons from Americas Best-Run Companies. New York Quality Paperback Book Club.Robbins, S.P., Judge, T.A. and Campbell, T.T. (2010) Organisational Behavior. Essex Pearson Education.Rost, J.C. (1991) Leadership for the Twenty-First Century. Westport Praeger.Scandura, T. and Dorfman, P. (2004) Leadership research in an international and cross-cultural context, The Leadership Quarterly, Vol. 15, No. 2, pp. 277-307.Scholtes, P.R. (1998) The Leaders Handbook Making Things Happen, Getting Things Done. New York McGraw-Hill.Scott, M. (2010) spark advance with heart, Smart Business St. Louis, Vol. 3, No. 2, pp. 10-14.Sanders, K. and Schyns, B. (2006) Leadership and solidarity behaviour Consensus in perception of employees within teams, Personnel Review, Vol. 35, No. 5, pp. 538-556.Shamir, B., House, R.J. and Arthur, M. B. (1993) The motivational effects of charismatic leadership A self-concept-based theory, Organisational Science, Vol. 4, No. 4, pp. 577-594.Shaw, M. (1976) Group Dynamics the Ps ychology of Small Group Behavior. 2nd Edition. New York McGraw-Hill.Slater, R. (2003) Jack Welch on Leadership. New York McGraw-Hill.Stogdill, R.M. (1974) Handbook of Leadership A subject of Theory and Research. New York Free Press.Thomas, D.C. (2008) Cross-Cultural Management Essential Concepts. 2nd Edition. Los Angeles Sage.Tyler, D.A. (2008) Trust in behaviour, not Charisma. Third Sector. 30 July, p. 25.Vadell, J. (2008) The Role of Trust in Leadership U.S. Air Force Officers Commitment and mark to Leave the Military. PhD Thesis, Capella University.Vroom, V.H. and Yetton, P.N. (1973) Leadership and Decision Making. Pittsburgh University of Pittsburgh press.Walumbwa, F. O., Lawler, J. and Avolio, B.J. (2007) Leadership, individual differences, and work-related attitudes A cross-culture investigation, Applied Psychology An International Review, Vol. 56, No. 2, pp. 212-230.Weber, M. (1947) The Theory of Social and Economic Organization. New York Free Press.Wilson, J.S. (2010) Want ed Inspirational leaders. Business Week. 3 October, p. 7.Wilson, M.S. and Rice, S.S. (2004) wire to inspire Leading organisations through adversity, Leadership in Action, Vol. 24, No. 2, pp. 3-7.Yukl, G. (1989) Managerial leadership A suss out of theory and research, Journal of Management, Vol. 15, No. 2, pp. 251-289.Yukl, G. and Falbe, C.M. (1990) Influence tactics and objectives in upward, downward, and lateral influence attempts, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 75, No. 2, pp. 132-140.Zeffane, R. (2010) Towards a two-factor theory of interpersonal trust A focus on trust in leadership, International Journal of Commerce and Management, Vol. 20, No. 3, pp. 246-257.