Leadership Model Paper: Management Principles
Research suggests that everyone is a manager in their own way. For instance, everyone manages his finances, time, careers and relationships. These examples of managing are simple and straightforward. However, when concepts of management apply in organizations, management becomes complex. At such a point, it calls for extensive studying in order to understand the theoretical basis of management. The application of management and the enunciation of management practices date back to the 19th century. In addition, management, organization, leadership, and organizational concepts have a link, in that they all connect to an organization’s effectiveness (Bolden et al., 2003). The establishment of management as an academic discipline is a recent development attributed to the works of Peter F. Ducker in the 20th century.
The body of knowledge is taught in learning institutions and in programs that prepare managers for tasks in every organization. Managers are people who receive a formal appointment to positions of authority in firms, companies or organizations. Owing to their authority, the managers facilitate others to do their work and are responsible to a higher power for work outcomes. The main differences between levels of managers are the extent of authority and scope of their responsibility for work outcomes. Line managers are responsible for managing people and things while staff managers, for instance the human resource manager support the work done by the line managers.
The society will judge managers owing to their organizational performance. The way they set their organization’s standards, coordinate and integrate teamwork, make decisions, and design the organization, will have a hand in the results on the performance. Research suggests that high-performing organizations have a value approach that enhances their organization’s objectives. Additionally, research also distinguishes managers and leaders based on the perception that managing is central to caretaking and maintaining status quo, whereas leading is central to vision and dynamic. However, this distinction does not hold any practical application (Crippen, 2005). Therefore, managers will have to ensure effective and current organizational activities. In addition, they will have to ensure they envision the organization’s future and use the vision to transform the organization when needed.
Background of the Study
Leadership is a process that allows management to adopt pro-activeness rather than reactive in shaping the organization’s future. A focused organizational leader will provide and develop visionary leadership in their organization. Such a leader understands and appreciates the nature of business management. Therefore, the leader will formulate responsive options to the changes concerning the management environment. In addition, the leader will develop viable strategies based on sustainable competitive advantages (Crippen, 2005). The leader will also develop a proactive approach concerning strategic management, rather than identifying and reacting to change, anticipates or even develops the change. Good leadership will improve the management or scarce organizational resources in the end improve the living standards of the society.
Leadership vs. Management
In any business, embracing an entrepreneurial spirit is vital for financial growth and the overall success of the organization. Therefore, for such businesses, they dedicate their efforts to ensure development of the business towards success. A continuous nurture of the business will make the managers and leaders aim at providing the best services and goods at cheap rates to gain a competitive advantage. Additionally, without contemplating on what constitute leadership and management, business scholars embark on a journey perceived to aim at achieving the overall objective. Ironically, these business leaders or managers are inadequately experience owing to their expertise, background and interest to manage the business or organizations in a strategic manner (Crippen, 2005). Overall, management and leadership are essential for success, and if undermined, the businesses may fail to achieve their overall objectives.
Leadership is a process that enables a group member to impact fellow colleagues towards accomplishing the common objective. Although there are different leadership styles, there are specific leadership components that will automatically exist in all the leadership-style definitions (Hater and Bass, 1988). The varying definitions will undisputedly agree that leadership is a process; it incorporates influence, includes accomplishment of a well-labeled objective, and happens in a group context. Therefore, regardless of the functioning of leadership, the elements will play an important contributing role in the used theory and definition of leadership.
From a different perspective, management is understood from different definitions. In addition, this does not suggest that an individual cannot carry out both the leadership and management roles. However, people perceive management as following a definition, which is quite different from leadership. This is because management definition incorporates supervisory, administrative and an executive direction of a business or organization (Washington, 2007). This means that management and leadership are perceived to have numerous similarities. Both management and leadership are ways of influencing and collaborating with people aiming at achieving the overall objective. However, it is possible to view both management and leadership fields in an independent manner.
Leadership is an old concept employed in business for many centuries. On the other hand, management is a concept, which developed over the last ten decades because of industrial transformation. Several scholars view the management as an approach through which activities are accomplished in a way that makes it possible to master routines. Therefore, leading aims at influencing others and establishment of a vision through which can enhance change (Crippen, 2005). Other scholars understand leadership as a relationship with multidisciplinary impact while management is an authoritarian leadership aligned towards a particular direction.
In addition, other scholars suggest that management and leadership are two different business approaches that different individuals should handle. For example, when management activities aimed at helping employees to achieve organizational objectives, this form of management operates under the leadership. In addition, when leaders carry out activities such as organizing, planning, controlling and staffing, the leaders are operating under management (Bolden et al., 2003). This is a typical example that suggests that the two elements will involve interchanging and similar tasks making it hard to isolate the both.
Statement of the Problem
Every organization in the globe, big or small needs good leadership. Resources both man and the material will require good leadership to avoid wastage owing to their scarce nature. In developing organizational leaders, this will enhance financial development and subsequently enhance growth in the developing countries. However, there exists controversy as to the transferability of management practices and theories because most of the theories and techniques related to management are central to western concepts and values approaches. In management, there is an agreement that the eventual approach to leadership is the most appropriate. However, the leadership style adopted should rely on the virtues and character of the leader, subordinates and the organizational culture.
Review of Literature
Leadership still is a complex phenomenon leading to the development of many theories. This is because there are numerous definitions about what it is an under what conditions is leadership apparent. For many years, people have been looking for direction, purpose and meaning to guide their general activities (Washington, 2007). Leadership is vital for them to realize direction, purpose, imagination and passion in times of rapid change. This is because in such times, people will look for leaders for hope, inspiration and a pathway that will lead them to somewhere desirable. Leadership has had a great influence on culture history and the civilization of humankind; theoretical explanations for it have proffered throughout history (Hater and Bass, 1988).
Many theories developed in a bid to explain of what leadership or where leadership emerges. The Trait Approach endured up to the late 1940s suggested that leadership ability is inborn. However, in the late 1940s Behavioral Approach gained dominance because it advocated that the effectiveness in leadership have to do with the leader’s behavior. In the late 1960s to around 1980, the Contingency Approach gained popularity claiming that effective leadership depends on the situation (Washington, 2007). Recent approaches to leadership focus on vision and charisma. Later on some other concepts such as transactional and transformational leadership developed.
Trait Theories of Leadership
The study of exceptional traits of leaders emerged from the belief that leadership and abilities such as intelligence were inherited. Additionally, other factors including birth order, status and liberal parents highly have a correlation to some leadership abilities. This model of leadership theory dominated in the studies concerning leadership until the 1950s. The approach tired to define a varying physical or psychological attributes of an individual that attempts to explain the behavior of leaders (Dereli, 2007). The approach suggests that leadership ability is inborn. However, the approach had some shortcomings. First, the approach does not clarify the most important traits and the least important. Secondly, some of the traits suggested overlap. For instance, the theory lists tact, judgment and common sense as separate traits, but the last trait covers the preceding traits.
Thirdly, most of the studies on traits do not provide a difference between traits assist to become a leader and those traits that made one maintain leadership. Another shortcoming was that most of the studies on traits are descriptive. There is a pre-assumption that the leader’s traits existed before leadership and most of them failed to approach the study of personality. Several studies aiming at identifying some of the leadership traits reveal that most of the traits were unimportant compared to other traits (Dereli, 2007). In this context, some scholars have argued that the failure to outline leadership traits should account to the lack of measurement and comparison of data from the many studies conducted. Some of the recent studies utilized measurement procedures focusing on managers and leaders.
Behavioral Theories of Leadership
The lack of tracing important leadership traits urged scholars to explore the behaviors exhibited by specific leaders. Behavioral studies of leadership primarily aim at identifying behaviors that distinguish leaders from non-leaders. These theories support that a set of specific behaviors qualify as a style of leadership (Washington, 2007). In this context, leadership styles refer to a distinctive behavior adopted by individuals holding important positions of leadership and several studies including the Hawthorne studies, Lowa studies, Ohio state studies and University of Michigan studies conducted to identify the behaviors.
Recent Developments of leadership Theories
The recent developments will help in understanding leadership by avoiding all the complicated and sophisticated explanations concerning leadership behavior, and attempt to explore leadership from the perception of ordinary people.
Attribution Theory of Leadership
The theory suggests that individuals possess hidden leadership theories in their minds in respect to what constitutes a good leader. This means that the people create their model leader. Such a leader is favorable provided one appeals to the theories revolving in people’s minds (Washington, 2007). This theory suggests that leadership is largely symbolic in the eye of the people. One of the interesting elements of the theory is that effective leaders have an association with consistency in the decision making phase.
Charismatic Leadership Theory
Charisma refers to “magical aura” possessed by only a few leaders. Research suggests that there are three basis of authority including traditions, rights, privileges, and charisma, which is synonymous with heroism and an exceptional character of an individual. Owing to their character, strength and proficiency, super human qualities are attributed to a leader who saves his staff or followers from a crisis or a calamity and becomes an idol (Hater and Bass, 1988). The charismatic leader attaches significance to their vision speech, and ability to take risks. In addition, they attach utmost significance to their subordinate’s emotions. Such leaders have significant effects on their followers including undying trust from their followers, finds acceptance from their followers, attracts affection, obedience from their followers, admiration for the leader, emotional inclusion in the organization’s mission, and congruence between the leader’s team and the group’s culture.
Contingency Theories of Leadership
The contingency perception of leadership emerged from the systems theory and its effects on organizational and administrative theory. The approach suggests that a particular leader behavior will relate to team job results and fulfillment. In order to achieve this, specific variables will work with each other such as the leader, the position they hold, team members, internal and external settings of the organization (Washington, 2007). A successful match between the leader and the team’s performance and satisfaction is the aspect referred to as ‘contingent.’ Three situational variables arbitrate between the leadership mode and efficiency, which are leader-employee relations, task design, and level of authority.
Leader Participation Model
The leader participation model is central to five approaches of decision-making, which range from highly autocratic to allow for consultations. The efficiency of an approach relies on several contingent elements, which can be summed up as information inadequacy, structure of the problem, and subordinate attitudes and relationship with the leader (Washington, 2007). The model constitutes of complex decision-making tree involving seven contingencies whose relevance can be evaluated by answering “Yes” or “No” questions and five other alternative leadership styles.
The model was revised by expanding the contingency variables to twelve, ten that are answered along a five-point scale. In addition, the model suggests that leadership studies should aim at the situation not the leader. This is because it is sensible to talk about participative and autocratic situations than the leaders who have the attributes. This is because a leader’s behavior changes depending on the situation and a leader can alter their leadership style to cater for different situations.
Managing is one of the most significant human operations. Back in history, human beings started establishing communal organizations to achieve aims and goals they could not achieve as individuals, managing from the past have shown importance to ensure the coordination of individual efforts. As the people continuously depended on team effort, and as many organized teams have happen to extensive, the role of managers has increasingly shown importance and the complexity. Henceforth, managerial theory has become vital in the manner managers manage complicated organizations (Olum, 2004). However, the different approaches of management evaluations have resulted in much confusion as to how to define management, management theory, and how to evaluate managerial events. In addition, contemporary theories of management tend to account for and assist in the explanation of the quickly changing of organizational setting.
Classical Organizational Theory School
This theory represents the work of Max Weber’s bureaucratic theory and Henri Fayol’s administrative theory. Weber suggested that western civilization was shifting from ‘wertrational’ thinking, affective action, and traditional action to ‘Zweckational.’ The scholar believed that civilization was changing to seek technically optimal outcomes at the expense of emotional or humanistic content (McGurk, n.d). Fayol’s administrative theory focuses on personal duties of management at a much more granular standard. In other words, his piece of work is aligned at the management level. Fayol believed that management had five significant roles to forecast and plan, to organize, to command, to coordinate, and to control. In addition, he developed fourteen principles the administration should go with along with the set management roles (Olum, 2004).
Recent Developments in Management Theory
The most recent theories include the systems approach, situational or contingency theory, chaos theory and team building theory. The system theory had essential impact on management science and understanding organizations. A system is a collection of part combined to achieve an overall objective. Removing a part of the system will lead to a change in the system. A system has inputs, activities and results. Into the bargain, the systems share results among each of the four elements of the system. The system theory has an effect on managers because it helps them to look at the organization in a broad manner (McGurk, n.d). In addition, the theory has assisted managers to interpret patterns and events happening in the workplace. For instance, the theory enables managers to identify the various parts of an organization, especially the interrelations of the parts.
The situational or contingency theory suggests that when managers make a decision, they must consider all elements of the present situation and act on those factors that are significant to the current situation. On the other hand, Tom Peters advocated the Chaos theory. He suggested that the chaotic and random global events are what happen in an organization. A new theory referred to chaos theory, emerged to recognize that most of the chaotic events are rarely controlled. Some theorists suggest that systems naturally go to complexity, and as they do so, they become volatile and must require a lot of energy to maintain stability.
The trend continues to an extent where the system splits, combines with another complicated system or falls apart wholly. This will need an effective manager to avoid the stated scenarios from happening. The team building approach or theory is another management theory. The theory emphasizes quality circles, best practices, and continuous improvement (Olum, 2004). The theory primarily hinges on the reliance of teamwork. In addition, the theory also emphasizes flattening of management pyramid and decreasing the levels of hierarchy. Finally, it is all about consensus management such as including people at all levels in decision-making.
Other Management Theories
In this group, comprises the works of Edward W. Deming and Douglas McGregor. In this category, Edward Deming is the founder of modern quality management and regarded by the Japanese as the primary influence in their postwar economic miracle. He initiated some assumptions: 1) create constancy of intention for continued advancement of goods and service; 2) espouse the new beliefs established in Japan; 3) stop reliance on mass inspection; build quality along with cost; 4) improve regularly in every process including planning, production, and service; 5) advocate for latest methods of training on-the-job involving administration; 6) embrace and introduce leadership aimed at helping people to perform on their job; 7) elimination of fear, encourage effective two-way communication and 8) breakdown obstructions (Olum, 2004).
McGregor hypothesized management concepts as outlined in Theory X and Theory Y He used the human behavior research and noted that the way an organization runs relies on the culture of its managers. Theory X provides a negative perception of human behavior and management that he considered having dominated the management theory. The theory assumes that most people are incapable of taking accountability. Therefore, the theory perceives such people as lazy, dislike work and requires a mixture of financial inducements and threat of losing their jobs to make them embrace work (Olum, 2004). On the contrary, Theory Y suggests that people aim at satisfying themselves through achieving self-respect, self-development, and self-development. However, the theory has assumptions.
The theory assumes that work is natural as playing or resting, human beings like work, and the classification of work as a source of pleasure or punishment will rely on the environment of the job and the leadership. The theory also assumes that effort at work does not depend on the threat of punishment. In addition, the theory also assumes that commitment to attain objectives is a result of the various rewards the employees will get from their achievements. Another assumption is that human beings learn under appropriate conditions to seek accountability. Additionally, the theory assumes that high degrees of imagination, ingenuity and creativity are widely circulated in the population. The last assumption is that under the conditions of modern lives, the intellectual potentials of an average human being are only utilized partly (Olum, 2004).
Leaders and managers should recognize that a larger percentage of workers desire a job that is fun. Therefore, fun, play and laughter is among an employee’s needs. This means that leaders and managers should provide opportunities for their employees to have fun in their work. Playful activities should aim at bringing joy to the employee. Recreational activities are easy to execute, cheap and welcomed by employees (Pierce and Newstrom, 2011). However, implementation of playful may pose some significant negative challenges including negativity from society, significant fears among leaders (low productivity, extra costs) and may result to leaders to feel some embarrassment. Although some of the impedicaments are crucial, it is possible to overcome such barriers.
Prior research on fun at work suggest that the practice will result to enthusiasm among employees, potential to attract applicants, increases employee motivation, improves communication between employees and improves employee portfolio. Therefore, from a manager’s perspective, it is possible to get you employees to accomplish more if the work involves some fun. In addition, it is possible to work and have fun, while engaging in meaningful and productive work (Pierce and Newstrom, 2011). However, owing to the view that fun is not a vital part of the manager’s responsibilities, it is possible to convince the leaders into accepting the practice by providing evidence of its benefits.
Into the bargain, there is evidence that fun at work can lead to production of varying activities that result into positive psychological and physiological outcomes for the employees and equal profits for organizations. However, before managers execute fun programs, it is essential for them to outline the criteria the program must meet and review them regularly. In conclusion, managers and leaders should involve the employees and welcome their ideas as they can offer support for fun at the workplace. The sure way to establish the benefits of fun at work is to measure them on a pretest and posttest manner. However, design of fun programs is quick, easy and inexpensive.
Implementing Fun at Work
From the manager’s perspective, owing to the fact, management is all about using guiding principles; implementation will also require a set of guidelines to help them keep up a fun workplace. The managers should aim at solving their employee’s needs first and should make sure they always motivate the employees. It is also important to certain that the fun programs coincide with the organization’s culture and verify if the employees need fun at work. In addition, the managers will need to establish fun programs based on philosophical foundation to achieve intention behind endorsing such programs (Pierce and Newstrom, 2011). The fun at work programs will also require manager’s involvement and to fun as an essential part of the firm. Another significant principle is to involve employees to take part in developing fun experiences. However, the leaders should always recognize their employees (Pierce and Newstrom, 2011). For instance, they can do it by appreciating them and respecting their employees. In addition, the leaders and managers should come up with a broad variety of fun-related activities to keep the activity new and fresh.
This paper borrows from a research paper and utilizes the response from a community foundation in the Southern U.S. From the research paper, it utilized a multi-organizational sample in order to enhance variation and generalizability. On average, the participants from the daycare had worked in their present work for 5.2 years and 10.5 years in their current organizations (Washington, 2007).
Collection of the data followed two phases to measure management principles applied in leadership. All employees accessed a questionnaire that aimed at capturing some of the management principles they though applied in the organization. The research allowed for anonymity and confidentiality for participants who assisted in the research.
Principles applied by Leaders in the Daycare Based in Southern U.S.
In the management context, the term principles lack a rigid definition. To some business scholars the term refers to an unquestioned way of doing things. In addition, other scholars such as Fayol suggested that principles are flexible, and able adaptation for every need, it is a matter of knowing how to utilize the principles, which is a complex art requiring intelligence, experience, decision-making and proportion. In management, there is no limit to the number of principles because as advancement is continuous it is possible to identify other principles.
Division of work is a renowned concept of assigning separate tasks to people according to their specialization and purpose to produce more results. Research suggests that division of work will lead to increased expertise, which in turn increases productivity. In addition, specialization that comes from division of work, will realize increased performance because employees will not lose time shifting from one activity to another. This principle will lead to benefits, which the organization must balance against expected disadvantages associated with such negatives including boredom and monotony. The day care uses this principle to divide the work among its employees and these have yielded positive results on job performance.
Authority refers to the privilege to grant orders and the power to demand obedience. It is important to distinguish between formal authority, which managers hold by virtue of their office, rank, or personal authority. Research suggests that some managers complement their official authority with personal authority. In addition, authority and accountability are corollaries in the sense that wherever there is an exercise of authority issues concerning responsibility arise. Authority is a significant principle because it will have to appear throughout the management literature. This research suggests that the managers in the day care are responsible owing to the fact that they listen and treat their employees equally.
Discipline refers to respect and obedience between an organization and its workforce. In addition, discipline is a vital aspect to ensure a smooth functioning and prosperous organization. Many of the employees suggested that they had no reason to disobey their superiors at any case. This is because the leaders respected them and treated them as valuable assets for the organization. Although it is possible to have defects in discipline, this may result from the part of an organization’s manager. The principle of discipline came from placing knowledgeable managers at all levels of management, workplace agreements that work well for both managers and the workforce, and the judicious utilization of employee sanctions.
Unity of command refers to any action; it is only possible for an employee to receive orders from their superiors. This means that no employee can serve two masters and obeying or serving several commands is a threat to authority, discipline and the general stability of the organization. For the present research, all employees showed concern the way their superiors ordered them when working. However, they maintained that, although, at times, they had to attend to different situations simultaneously, this was manageable.
Subordination of individual interests to the general interest is a request to eliminate ignorance, ambition, selfishness, laziness, weakness and any other human passion. The placing of an employee or team’s interest over an organization’s general welfare would result to conflict among the participating parties. In addition, it is important to note that people who serve themselves are harmful to their interests of their colleagues and the organization in general. Most of the employees suggested that working for a day care was a challenge, but due to their continuous working, they eventually manage to put their devotion to serving the organization (Washington, 2007).
Remuneration is a principle that deals with daily wages, piece rates, bonuses and any other activity that deals with profit sharing. However, the most appropriate employee remuneration relies on many elements. In general, however, an organization’s method of payment will need fairness, should aim at motivating the employees by rewarding successful job performance, and should not engage in an overpayment. In addition, non-financial incentives are a form of remuneration. The day care rewards their employees according to their performance, and the employees showed satisfaction. In addition, the employees showed satisfaction to the pay they received from the organization.
Equity is a principle that results from a combination of kindliness and justice. As such, equity allows for a basis for dealing with the workforce and instilling devotion and loyalty. An attempt to distinguish between equity and equality, in the attempt, the equity theory arose. In addition, it is important to note that when dealing with the workforce’ desire to achieve equity, the managers and leaders must regularly summon their highest faculties. Most of the employees expressed that they felt their managers treated them equally without exception (Washington, 2007). They all arrived to work at the same time worked for the same hour’s daily and received equal pay for their jobs.
Scalar chain is a principle defined as a chain of the superiors from the topmost authority to the lowest form of authority. This path of command shows the organization’s line of authority and the connections through which to convey information from the top to the staff and back. There was the development of “gang plank” that aimed to counter potential communication defects resulting from the management to the staff. The employees felt that they were free with their leaders. This meant that they could express themselves without fear. In addition, the management communicates with their staff regularly (Washington, 2007). This creates an environment where communication is achievable from the management to the staff.
Bolden, R., Goslig, J., Marturano, A., & Dennison, P. (2003). A Review of Leadership
Theory and Competency Frameworks. Retrieved from http://www2.fcsh.unl.pt/docentes/luisrodrigues/textos/Lideran%C3%A7a.pdf
Crippen, C. (2005). Servant leadership as an effective model for educational leadership and management: First to serve, then to lead. Management in Education, 18(5),
Dereli, C. (2003). A Survey Research of Leadership Styles of Elementary School Principles.
Retrieved from http://etd.lib.metu.edu.tr/upload/1013432/index.pdf
Hater, J.J., & Bass, B.M. (1988). Superiors’ evaluations and subordinates’ perceptions of transformational and transactional leadership. Journal of Applied Psychology,
McGurk, P. (n.d). The Contingent Role of Management and Leadership in the development for Middle Managers. Retrieved from http://etheses.lse.ac.uk/277/1/McGurk_The%20contingent%20role%20of%20.pdf
Olum, Y. (2004). Modern Management Theories and Management Practices. Retrieved from http://unpan1.un.org/intradoc/groups/public/documents/AAPAM/UNPAN025765.pdf
Pierce, L.J. And Newstrom, W.J. (2011). The Manager’s Bookshelf: A Mosaic of Contemporary Views, (9th ed.). New York: Harper & Row.
Washington, R.R. (2007). Empirical Relationships among Servant, Transformational,
and Transactional Leadership: Similarities, Differences, and Correlations with Job Satisfaction and Organizational Commitment. Retrieved from http://etd.auburn.edu/etd/bitstream/handle/10415/810/WASHINGTON_RYNETTA_3.pdf