Numerous scholars have sought to describe and understand leadership. This is no surprise because, in societies, the quality of the day-to-day life of individuals is determined by decisions made by those in leadership roles. Based on this background, proper leadership can be viewed as the awareness that the decisions made have implications not only for individuals but also for the society as a whole (Liden et al., 2014). Therefore, a good leader must understand the ramifications of even the smallest decision that he/she makes. This is particularly important putting the power available to him or her into consideration (Antonakis, 2017). How leaders exercise their responsibilities over the roles in their jurisdiction is a key determinant of their leadership approach.
The leadership style that I prefer to exercise entails leading from the front by being an example. This means that I focus on making sure that my behavior and leadership traits are such that they are aligned towards being balanced and open while giving room to suggestions and trusting the people that I work with. This is because I believe that people tend to do their best when certain levels of responsibility are entrusted to them. For instance, in a previous assignment, I was entrusted to lead a team, which comprised of my colleagues. In the execution of this task, I set the goals and assigned timelines, while guiding the team on how to achieve each milestone. However, I let each member of the team decide on completion of their specific assignments. Ultimately, this approach proved efficient since the team was able to achieve the set goals.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Behavioral approach is the leadership approach that resembles my leadership style closely. This approach to leadership mainly places emphasis and a focus on the behavior and conduct of a leader rather than his or her specific traits. A leader’s relationship with his subordinates constitutes a critical element of this leadership approach (Northouse, 2015). Through good behavior, a leader inspires, improves morale and creates an enabling work environment for his/ her subordinates to be productive. This leadership style resembles mine because it requires the leader to focus on how he or she conducts himself or herself. Therefore, it makes the leader personally responsible for both his or her output and that of the subordinates. For instance, in my experience, a leader has to take his or her day-to-day actions seriously because they have a direct implication on not only the workforce but also the entire organization.
The leadership approach that I would like to adopt is the Behavioral approach
This is because a leader's behavior affects that of his or her employees and influences their job satisfaction (Northouse, 2015). Therefore, a leader’s role in defining and organizing the relationship between himself or herself and the entire staff is vital (Dinh et al., 2014). Emphasis is placed on such traits as empathy, trust, friendliness, offering support and taking care of the employees’ welfare. Adherence to these aspects leads to higher productivity and output among employees. To align my leadership style to the behavioral approach, I would focus on bringing the best in those under me. This is because I believe in a relational oriented leadership style that allows employees to be treated as important parts in the achievement of the organizational goals. This approach is a win-win for everyone since people respond better to positive affirmation and being well taken care of.
The three leadership approaches that I would not like to adopt are the trait approach, skills approach, and situational approach. The trait approach to leadership inclines to the belief that leaders are born and not made (Northouse, 2015). It assumes that if an individual possesses certain qualities from birth, then they are naturally qualified to lead. The trait leadership theory supposes that if a person possesses specific innate skills, then they are better suited to lead than others. This is because it is assumed that they will be at a great advantage (Northouse, 2017). The qualities that seem to offer this leadership advantage are knowledge of the business, initiative, tenacity, energy, flexibility, creativity, charisma, emotional intelligence, confidence, drive to succeed, good judgment and integrity. While this is one of the earliest leadership theories, it is considered quite outdated.
Those who were staunch proponents of this theory believed in identifying potential leaders early and then distinguishing them from those that are not seen as leaders. Subsequently, those who are identified are trained and developed. The trait approach is based on several assumptions, and that is why I see no reason to adopt it. For example, character traits can be acquired through time especially when it comes to those that are not natural. Therefore, any person can transform their lives for the better and become great at whatever they do. It is hence not right to assumed that a leader is simply born. Individuals can become great over a period and after a lot of dedication, consistent practice, and endurance. It is for these reasons that I believe that someone's traits do not automatically make them a better leader. Learning to be a real leader takes time, and while having certain traits might help, it does not offer any guarantees.
The skills approach is a leader-centered approach that is based on the knowledge and special skill set that a leader possesses. The skills approach is different from the Trait approach because it is focused on the abilities that a leader possesses rather than who he or she is. This theory simply proposes that for any leader to be effective in the discharge of his duties, he must have the right skills, abilities, and knowledge. The skills approach can be elaborated using two theories. These are the Katz’s Three Skills Approach and Leadership Skill Approach. The Katz’s Three Skills Approach proposes that an effective leader has three main skill sets. These are technical, human and conceptual skills (Northouse, 2015).
Technical skills refer to the ability to work with machinery, objects and other tools while possessing specific knowledge that aids in yielding certain output for an organization. This is useful for most supervisors in an organization as they act as the overseers of quality control for any output. Human skill refers to the ability to collaborate and work with others within a group setting. It refers to people-skills. Interpersonal skills enable a leader to harness the power of communication to build effective workplace relationships that foster corporation. It is through those relationships that motivation of employees and colleagues enables quality output and job satisfaction. Conceptual skills allude to skills of the mind. The ability to conceive ideas and work to bring them to fruition is a valuable skill in the workplace. This is a skill that is especially significant for managers at various levels and offers an organization the chance to see its vision nurtured to maturity. The ability to perceive an idea correctly and to carry it through to its ultimate end is an act that requires significant mental fortitude and presence.
Michael Mumford developed the Leadership Skill Approach. This approach suggests that most people have the chance to become great leaders if they learn from their experiences and develop certain skills that will enable them to become effective leaders (Northouse, 2015). It consists of five main elements. These are competencies, individual attributes, leadership outcomes, career experiences and environmental influences. Competencies mainly constitute three major skills. These are problem-solving, social judgment and knowledge. Problem-solving entails finding creative solutions to problems encountered. Social judgment is what enables someone to understand people and the social systems and structures. The Leadership Skill approach proposes to highlight what it takes to be an effective leader. Knowing what it takes to be an effective leader is essential. However, taking these steps is even more critical. The Skills approach is descriptive, and it does not necessarily motivate me into action. Likewise, it does not expound on the nitty-gritty of how to be an effective leader but just explains what it takes to be one. I believe that the biggest threat to being a good leader is having too much knowledge and skill. This is because we live in a world where skills can be celebrated at the expense of character. This is why I do not believe in this leadership style.
The situational leadership approach is a very dynamic, adaptive style that supposes that different situations demand different leadership styles. Situational leadership adapts to the current work environment and the organizational needs (Northouse, 2017). This method usually requires all leaders to shift their style according to the prevailing conditions. There are two primary models of situational leadership. One was described by Ken Blanchard and Paul Hershey while the other was put forth by Daniel Goleman. Situational leadership is mainly adaptive, and that means that it is reactive and not necessarily proactive. The core issues that cause environmental change may not be dealt with by advocating more for the adaptability of members of the organization. Due to these reasons, I would not want to adopt situational leadership.
Organizational change is vital to the survival of an organization. For instance, In Microsoft, following the long-lived and phenomenal success of its Office products and Windows operating system, the company was faced with numerous challenges. As a result, the company was stagnant and characterized by turf wars between its key business units. These entities often perceived each other more as competitors as opposed to partners in the same company. As a result, the toxic environment was preventing innovation. This kept the company dependent on the frequent updates of both Office and Windows products. Also, Microsoft was stagnant while Google became a dominant online force and Apple consistently owned the mobile products market, Microsoft struggled to keep up, with unevenly executed new products, such as Zune. This changed when Satya Nadella become Microsoft’s CEO in 2014. On appointment, Nadella massively restructured the company. This was aimed at resolving the ongoing internal competition (Bryant, 2014). Subsequently, all Microsoft’s platforms and products ceased to exist as separate entities. Further, all employees were expected to embrace a limited number of common goals. These included the reinvention of productivity and various business processes, the need for a more smart cloud platform and enhanced personal computing.
In 2016, Microsoft ventured into research in Artificial Intelligence (AI). This initiative boats approximately 5,000 computer scientists and engineers. Microsoft’s goal is to innovate in artificial intelligence across the Microsoft product line. This way, Nadella introduced a new sense of mission. Before the restructuring, employees had lacked a positive sense of purpose, with the result being low morale and weakened employee engagement. Although Microsoft’s future looks brighter as a result of the still-ongoing reorganization, its most significant achievement has already been realized. This is by offering the company’s employees a new sense that their work has real meaning. If I were to guide the Microsoft through the changes, I would lead by example and at the same time focus on the behavioral leadership approach. This is because the two approaches are employee centered. This implies that they would help in improving the productivity of the employees and hence Microsoft’s profitability.
References
Antonakis, J. (2017). The nature of leadership . Sage publications.
Bryant, A. (2014). Satya Nadella, Chief of Microsoft, on His New Role. New York Times
Dinh, J. E., Lord, R. G., Gardner, W. L., Meuser, J. D., Liden, R. C., & Hu, J. (2014). Leadership theory and research in the new millennium: Current theoretical trends and changing perspectives. The Leadership Quarterly , 25 (1), 36-62.
Liden, R. C., Wayne, S. J., Liao, C., & Meuser, J. D. (2014). Servant leadership and serving culture: Influence on individual and unit performance. Academy of Management Journal , 57 (5), 1434-1452.
Northouse, P. G. (2017). Introduction to leadership: Concepts and practice . Sage Publications.
Northouse, P. G. (2015). Leadership: Theory and practice . Sage publications.
