Leadership is a challenging endeavor. Leaders have many responsibilities, and they are responsible for the performance of an organization or the state of affairs. Leadership in the public sector is even more challenging as leaders have limited resources at their disposal. Efficient leadership in public administration is not about employee motivation and performance; it also focuses on the efficient performance of government agencies (Milakovich & Gordon, 2013). Public administrators are guided by the values of transparency, accountability, efficiency among other values. However, public administers often face criticism due to the many cases of mismanagement, bureaucratic rules, and processes, lack of delegation and teamwork. Leaders in the public sector face a different set of challenges in comparison to leaders in the private sector. Thus, the purpose of this assessment paper is to examine a leadership theory that is appropriate for public administration. The assessment paper is divided into three parts, with the first part focusing on the leadership theory. The second part is an evaluation of my personal management style to judge whether it is useful to my current professional situation. Lastly, Part III is concerned with leadership goal identification and strategies for attaining the goals as a public administrator leader.
Part I: Leadership Theory for Public Administration
Public administration is a practice as old as human civilization. Public administration became a scholarly discipline in the early 20th century, and since then many books and research articles attempt to establish public administration theory (Lamidi, 2015). The works focus on successful public administrators such as Thomas Jefferson to identify leadership principles and practices to guide present public administrators. According to Milakovich & Gordon (2013), public administration in America is a complex and large enterprise made up of many smaller units. The actions of public administrators affect the daily lives of every American. Public administrators have the power and the resources to make decisions that affect many, and they take into consideration the broader economic, social and governmental processes when making decisions.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Northouse (2018) classifies the different leadership theories in public administration as trait theories, behavioral theories, and contingency. Behavioral leadership theory is the most appropriate for public administration. The behavioral theory was developed in response to the growing dissatisfaction with trait theories that claimed that leaders are born. The behavioral theory argues leaders can be trained as there are specific behaviors that differentiate effective leaders from the rest.
The Ohio State Studies was the most comprehensive studies on behavioral leadership conducted in the 1940s. The research aimed at identifying the independent dimensions of a leader’s behavior (Kellis & Ran, 2013). The two dimensions are initiating structure and consideration. Initiating structure is the extent in which the leader is likely to define the structure, and the role of employees towards goal attainment whereas consideration is the extent in which a leader is expected to have job relationships characterized by mutual trust, respect, and regard for employee feelings. The two dimensions of a behavioral leader are useful to public administrators. Public administrators should define the structure of the organization in a manner that enables them to achieve their goals, enhance efficiency and deliver services to the public smoothly. Public administration is often criticized because of the bureaucracy; thus public administrators should not be afraid to redefine organizational structure to get rid of bureaucratic processes and structures that hinder effective service delivery.
The second dimension of behavioral leadership theory from the Ohio State Studies is a consideration. Leaders should build a relationship with their employees based on trust and respect (Ospina, 2017). Public leaders should value their subordinates, and they should seek their opinions when making decisions that will affect the agency and the public. Northouse (2018) describe task-oriented versus relationship-oriented leadership in chapter four. Task-oriented leaders emphasize accomplishing tasks, unlike relationship-oriented leaders who emphasize interpersonal relationships to meet the needs of employees.
Task-oriented leaders are goal oriented, they want to achieve their goals, and they create calendars, to-do lists, and daily planners to help them accomplish tasks. Relationship-oriented leaders are still goal-oriented, but they find meaning in connecting with people, celebrating relationships and creating a dynamic team (Weinstein, 2013). In a work setting, a relationship-oriented leader is not afraid to interrupt an employee to talk about sports or the employee’s family. Relationship-oriented leaders also seek the opinion of employees when addressing a problem.
Northouse (2018) also explore the different leadership styles of authoritarian, democratic and laissez-faire. The right leadership style for public administration is democratic style. Democratic leadership style borrows the assumptions of McGregor’s Theory Y. Democratic leaders treat everyone fairly, and they do not put themselves above others. Democratic leaders guide and help others to achieve their personal goals. They do not use the top-down communication instead they speak on the same level as their followers. Democratic public leaders listen to their employees and assist them to achieve their goals so that they can serve the public better. Democratic leaders provide information, guidance, and suggestions, but they do so without appearing to be giving orders and applying pressure to the employers. Democratic public administrators expect their employees to achieve their goals; hence they empower them to enable them to work on their own without supervision. The leaders also give objective praise and criticism instead of criticizing the employees when they fail to achieve their goals.
Democratic public administrators work towards increasing employee satisfaction, commitment, and cohesiveness (Ospina, 2017). Under Democratic leadership, there is friendliness and group-mindedness; followers work together rather than engaging in selfish competition with each other that affects the team spirit negatively (Northouse, 2018). Under democratic leadership in the public administration, people are motivated by the leader such that they are willing to put in the extra effort to implement ideas and policies of the leader. Northouse (2018) warns that democratic leadership in public administration takes time and commitment. Public administrators have to be patient with employees.
Part II: Personal Leadership Style Evaluation
My leadership style is democratic, transformational, expert, referent style. The dominant leadership style is democratic showing that I am a group-oriented leader. Democratic leadership is also known as participative leadership or shared leadership. I refer to the group when making decisions, and the basis for making decisions is the majority rule. Democratic leadership is the best style for public administration since most modern societies are democratic societies. The four aspects that make up my leadership style are useful, and they complement each other.
Under a democratic leadership style, everyone has the opportunity to participate, share ideas freely and discuss ideas. The organization is guided by the values of equality, free flow of ideas, and the leaders offer guidance and control. As a leader, I decide who in the group get to contribute during the decision-making process as everyone cannot participate. I encourage creativity by seeking the opinion of the team to address problems that the organization is facing (Martin et al., 2014). Some of the values that guide my leadership include respect, trust, creativity, and fairness. I show respect for all of my team members to inspire them to take action and contribute to the group. I do not silence dissenting opinion; instead, I listen to those with a less popular point of view and react accordingly.
Another one of my leadership styles is transformational leadership. According to Pasha et al. (2017), transformational leaders aim to solve organizational problems by changing the way people look at the problem. As a leader, I realize that democratic leadership cannot solve all leadership problems. Transformational leadership is about inspiring followers to think beyond their immediate needs. As a transformational leader, I try to broaden the organization’s vision, clarify purpose, and encourage the rest of the team to implement change. Public administration requires transformational leaders to come up with a new vision, processes and build momentum among civil servants.
Northouse (2018) explore the different types of leadership power. Power is the source of the leader’s influence over subordinates. I use expert and referent power to influence my followers. Expert power is based on knowledge and experience. I have the right academic qualifications and years of experience that make me an expert in my current position. My team members do not hesitate to consult with me in case of a problem because they consider me an expert. Alternatively, referent power is derived from the followers’ view of the leader. According to Sharkey & Murray (2016), expert and referent power are predictors of transformational leadership. Referent power is a key predictor of transformational leadership as the followers recognize their leader’s ability to inspire and stimulate growth and creativity in them.
My current approach to leadership is useful in my profession as a public administrator. According to Ljungholm (2014), democratic leadership is one of the most effective styles contributing to increased productivity, a better contribution from group members and improved morale. Democratic leadership has many benefits, and yet in other cases, I lean towards transformational leadership to inspire my team. My approach to leadership works well for my team though there are certain cases where democratic leadership fail. Democratic approach is time-consuming, and it is not the right approach for emergency situations that require quick action and less consultation. Fortunately, as a leader with expert and referent power, I am in a position to make the best decisions for the team. I plan to continue using the same leadership approach in future. A combination of democratic and transformational leadership motivates and inspires employees to do better. As a leader, I believe that my employees have the necessary skills and it is my duty to inspire and create the best environment for them to excel.
Part III: Leadership Goals and Plans
As discussed by Milanovich & Gordon (2013) public administration is a large and complex sector. The field of public administration has many opportunities. In the future, I want to be in a challenging position in the state or the federal government. I will work methodologically to achieve my goals. As a local government officer in the housing and public works department*, I am responsible for a team of public officers involved in the strategic management of the local property. The department gives out building permits, refurbishes government building, and creates accommodation standards and deal with other issues concerning buildings within the city.
I am in a low-level leadership position within the department as I supervise a team of six employees responsible for a specific location within the city. In the future, I want to be in a position that enables me to make a real difference in the lives of the city residents. The department often receives complaints from the public concerning the state of buildings, private development in public lands, and poor management of the property. I want to be in a higher position within the state government that will enable me to work with the leaders to create better housing policies.
I cannot achieve my future goals unless I plan well and stick to my plans. I will create a list of short-term and long-term personal and career goals to guide me. In my experience, I can attest that setting career and personal goals are necessary. Setting goals propels one to move forward. I usually set goals to guide my week, month and even the whole year and as time passes I try to achieve those goals. Goals also insurmountable problems into small and achievable goals.
Career Goals
• To finish my master’s degree in public administration in the next two years.
• To be in a mid-level managerial position in the next five years.
Personal Goals
• To work on my leadership style
• To give back to the community.
Action Plan
I aspire to be a powerful position, probably as the CEO of the state’s housing department within the next ten years and my personal and career goals listed above will help me achieve my ultimate goal. The goal seems unrealistic, but I will break down the ten years by yearly basis and work on meeting the requirements of the position. The first step is to enroll for a master’s program and other professional courses in public administration required for mid and top-level managerial positions. I will also rely on my network and push myself out of the comfort zone to help me achieve my goals. My personal goal is to continue making a difference in whatever capacity I am in. I try to help others as much as I can, whether it is a colleague, my team members, family, friends, and the needy. I occasionally volunteer with a local nonprofit that mentors youth; and I plan to volunteer more often and mentor the poor youth and expose them to internship opportunities at my workplace. By volunteering more often, I will be exposed to the community needs so that I can serve them better.
The SWOT analysis in chapter 7 is used to evaluate a goal or a plan. My goal is to achieve a mid-level managerial position in the next five years. An obstacle is that there are many requirements for a mid-level management position. One has to be a good leader, have financial skills, housing department knowledge, public administration knowledge among others. The opportunity that will help me achieve the goal is modern technology. Technology makes it easy to learn new skills within a short span of time. One can attain a master’s degree online or learn other skills necessary for the job.
Conclusion
Leadership in public administration has evolved. Public administration leaders recognize the importance of adopting modern leadership styles. Growing evidence suggests that democratic and transformational leadership styles have the potential to improve performance in the public sector. Democratic and transformational leadership style increase the clarity of organizational goals and empowers employees. Public administration requires leaders committed to making a difference. Leaders at all levels in the public sector should work on improving their leadership styles and career advancement by making smart goals and implementing them.
References
Lamidi, K. O. (2015). Theories of Public Administration: An Anthology of Essays. International Journal of Politics & Good Governance , 6 (6.3), 1-35.
Ljungholm, D. P. (2014). The performance effects of transformational leadership in public administration. Contemporary Readings in Law and Social Justice , 6 (1), 110.
Kellis, D. S., & Ran, B. (2013). Modern leadership principles for public administration: time to move forward. Journal of Public Affairs , 13 (1), 130-141.
Martin, J., McCormack, B., Fitzsimons, D., & Spirig, R. (2014). The importance of inspiring a shared vision. International Practice Development Journal , 4 (2).
Milakovich, M. E., & Gordon, G. J. (2013). Public administration in America . Cengage Learning.
Northouse, P. G. (2018). Introduction to leadership: concepts and practice . SAGE.
Ospina, S. M. (2017). Collective leadership and context in public administration: bridging public leadership research and leadership studies. Public Administration Review , 77 (2), 275- 287.
Pasha, O., Poister, T. H., Wright, B. E., & Thomas, J. C. (2017). Transformational Leadership and Mission Valence of Employees: The Varying Effects by Organizational Level. Public Performance & Management Review , 40 (4), 722-740.
Sharkey, N., & Murray, I. (2016). Reinventing administrative leadership in Australian taxation: beware the fine balance of social psychological and rule of law principles. Austl. Tax F. , 31 , 63.
Weinstein, R. B. (2013). Servant leadership and public administration: Solving the public sector financial problems through service. Journal of Management Policy and Practice , 14 (3), 84-91.
