'Leadership Theories Essay\r'

'Classical and military manist commission theories come in down had a major influence on modern theories of leadinghip. Making effective use of seize models and theories critically examine whether this is the case.\r\nIn drift to tell this question, it leave alone be appropriate to explore at how classical and humanist theories emerged and unwrapline some of their theories relating to focusing. merely discussion will be on the division of worry in comparison to that of leaders with reason arguments on how far these theories conduct influenced modern leaders.\r\nThe stones throw towards industrial development in the 19th carbon led to the emergence of classical counselling theories with several(prenominal) approaches. matchless such approach was how managers should act, manage labor and deal with day to day problems of managing the business (Mullins 2004). illustration of theories on the above approach is command and reign over by Henri Fayol, bureaucratic o rganisation by scoop shovel Weber and scientific focussing by F W Taylor.\r\nFayol cited in Dilys Robinson (Training Journal, Jan 2005) favoured the idea of management organising confinement and managing pack through with(predicate) a power structure organization. He saw senior level managers as having license not only by virtue of their shoes within the organisation only withal on the increasing amount of decisions that managers had to brace. Senior level managers cascaded orders through a command chain governing body to employees and had nearly no interaction with act asers.\r\nIn addition Fayol taught that managers and workers had to brook by certain principles for the greater honourable of the organisation. For exercise manager’s had to treat workers with some tip of fairness whiles workers on the order hand were expect to accept and follow plans from one leader, sub-ordinate their interest and not step beyond their responsibilities.\r\nIn the comparable expressive style Max Weber in Derek Pugh & J Hickman (2007) like Fayol supported the idea of a peealize organisation structure as it legitimised ascendance and helped to lead problems that authority base on tradition and charisma created. He was also concerned about the likeliness of managers using their authority to abuse workers within the hierarchy system hence his idea that the relationship in the midst of the organisation and managers had to be impersonal in such a manner that managerial roles are appoint and their authority based on competence.\r\nAdditionally, Taylor in Dilys Robinson (Training Journal, Jan 2005) suggested that managers moldiness be responsible for organising work and the confinement assumption to selected and trained workers to perform in accordance to the mode managers deemed it. His idea watch overms to assert that there is one surpass way of performing task and that work task should be tailor made to fit those who have to perform them .\r\nAlternatively, humanist theorist which began to emerge on the background of classical management started to teach that workers were not only traveld by reward factors and that regard of human needs was also a make in motivating workers. Humanist theories also began to look at the behaviour of employees within the organisation. Examples of humanist management theories are Douglas McGregor’s X and Y opening and Rensis Likert’s management systems and styles.\r\nDouglas McGregor under theory X proposes that in certain situations managers must use their authority in order to get things done and pass on desired results. Under theory Y, also based on certain assumptions he proposes that managers must be more democratic in their approach as this will motivate staff to contribute more to the organisation.\r\nFurthermore Rensis Likerts in Derek Pugh & J Hickman (2007) determine four varying types of management styles bordering on the consumptive †authoritat ive, benevolent †authoritative, consultative and participative system. The first is characterised by compel decisions and use of threats and the second the use of rewards mainly to motivate staff. The third is were motive is by rewards and some employment and the fourth seen as the best solution in that management have confidence in their workers, accepted responsibility is felt by all, communication is abundant, team-work exists and where motivation is on economic rewards based on concord set goals between management and staff. McGraw Hill (1967) the human organisation, agrees that all organisation should adopt this. (http://www.accel-team.com/human_relations/hrels_04_likert.html)\r\nHowever in modern organisations the exploitative †authoritative style of management is less than ideal as this unremarkably results in staff feeling more de-motivated and demoralised. Staffs are also more likely to rebel and challenge management by lodging their grievances with interna l or outdoor(a) arbitration systems that are in place today.\r\nFrom the above, it end be that whiles views generated by the classical theorist thinks managers toilet only lead effectively through a formalised structure, by rules and command, humane views provides an alternative as to how managers must lead, they must consider the needs of their workers, advertise participation to motivate and utilise the full possible of workers for the good of the organisation.\r\nTo further develop this discussion, it would be usable to examine what management and leadership involves as arguments break open as to whether management and leadership are the same or not. However the difference between the cardinal has been shown to be in what both does. concern as a term is generic in sum and is defined by Terry and Rue in Ernest Dale (1969) as a process or form of work that involves guidance and directing of a group of people toward organisational goals and objectives. It also covers man y areas such as planning, organising, problem solving, controlling and putting appropriate structures in place. These are now seen as functions performed by individuals who have been assigned formal roles as managers.\r\n leadinghip in contrast is defined by Richard L Daft, Patricia G lane (2007) as ‘an influence relationship among leaders and followers who intend real changes and outcomes that stinkpot speculate their share purpose’. Mullins, L. J (2004) also defines leadership as ‘getting people to follow’ or getting people to do things willingly. From this definition what stands out is that leaders must have followers whiles management use available resources such as people to get things done. tom Swanick & Judy Mckimm in alphabet of Clinical Leadership supports this by citing management as involving the directing of people and resources to achieve organisational values and strategic direction established and propagated by leadership.\r\nOne exe mplar of what distinguishes leadership and management is when it comes to authority, leaders do not derive authority from a hierarchy system as managers do. An showcase of this is a case line of business in toilet Adair (2007) which was conducted at the laboratory of a molecular biology. The study found out that it was an milieu which assigned offices did not exist and all workers no matter of position integrated with one another. It allowed ideas to flourish and be shared which lead to great works macrocosm produced by the laboratory.\r\nMullins (2007) mentions also that in the performance of work task under the 7 S’s within the organisational frame work, leaders often make use of what is called the soft S’s, style, staff skills and shared goals whiles managers use the hard S’s which is structure, system and strategy. Zaleznik (1977) cited in Brooks (2005) lends his support and suggests that managers during contrast situations usually focus on achieving compromise to maintain order and do so in an unemotional and lay back manner which does not result in change.\r\nFor showcase the parties involved in a conflict may resolve their differences through compromise but does it guarantee that such a conflict will not arise again. Bennis and Nanus (1985) cited in alphabet of clinical leadership give additional burthen to the above and quotes ‘Managers are people that do things counterbalance’ but ‘leaders are people that do the right thing’.\r\nLeadership is also associated with being visionary. Gower (2010) for example cites leadership as being an ‘ employment that is visionary, creative, inspirational, energising and transformational’. Managers in contrast are seen as being less so. This may stem from the way management developed and trained from the past. Managers are usually assigned to be heads of departments within the organisation and as such tend to look at how they can meet targets with in their departments rather than thinking about what direction the whole organisation is heading or needs to head in today’s ever complex and changing environment. In well-fixed of these differences, management is still seen as being intertwined with leadership as the former has to exercise leadership in the performance of their duties. For example Bolman & Deal (1997) see both as necessary for success as organisations that are over managed with little leadership liaison or vice versa results in failure.\r\nIn certainty it can be said that classical and humanistic theories have had a great restore on modern leadership in various ways. One of these is that it has changed the way leadership is viewed worldwide. Calls have been made for leadership to be exemplary and moral. A recent example was the leader of Italy, Mr Berlusconi who faced a lot of criticisms on certain aspects of his behaviour whiles in office and as a result was forced to resign from his position.\r\n d evelopment in communication between organisations and with external bodies has been another. Leaders are seen as the face of the organisation and to resurrect its success, leaders go to great strengths to forge good relations with the communities within which they operate.\r\nFinally another impact on modern leadership has been the increase in innovative ideas and technology which has resulted in economic growth. An example of a leader who has shown innovation and vision is grudge Elliot Zuckerbery, owner of Facebook, who transformed the idea of creating a college favorable website into a global enterprise.\r\nReferences:\r\nBrooks Ian (2005), Organisational behaviour: individuals, groups and organisation, tertiary ed, Pearson Education [online] procurable at www.dawsonera.com\r\nBuechlar scratch; Martin David; Knaebel Hans Peter; Buechlar Markus W, Leadership characteristic and business management in modern academic surgery, Langenberks Archives of Surgery, Volume 391, thin: 2, Pages149-156. [online] lendable on ISI web of knowledge, Accessed\r\n12/12/2011\r\nDerek S Pugh & David J Hickson, (2007), Great writers on organisations, 3rd omnibus ed, Ash gate publication Ltd, [online] ready(prenominal) on www.dawsonera.com]\r\nDilys Robinson, http://www.trainingjournal.com/feature/2005-01-01-management-theorists-thinkers-for-the-2initiatory-century/ [Accessed 15/12/11]\r\nErnest Dale (1969), Management: Theory and Practice, Copyright 1993, Carlos C. Lorenzana & Rex harbor store [online] Google Books, Accessed 18/12/2011\r\nGower handbook of leadership and management development, GB: Gower (2010), Edited by Jeff Gold, Richard Thorpe, Alan Mumford [online] Available on www.dawsonera.com\r\nhttp://www.accel-team.com/human_relations/hrels_04_likert.html)\r\nJohn Adair (2007), leadership for innovation, kogan Page Ltd [online] Available at www.dawsonera.com, Accessed 21/12/11\r\nMullin, L. J (2004), Management and Organisational behaviour, 7th ed., Pe arson Education\r\nMullin, L. J (2007), Management and Organisational behaviour, 8th ed., Harlow: Financial Times Prentice mansion\r\nRichard L Draft, Patricia G Lane (2007), The leadership experience, [online] Available on Google books, Accessed 21/12/11\r\nTom Swanick & Judy Mckimm, ABC of Clinical leadership 1st edition, (2010) Bmj Books, [online] Available on www.dawsonera.com, Accessed 12/12/2012\r\nBibliography:\r\nJohn P kotter, What Leaders really do, Harvard Business civilise Press, Boston, Available [online] www.HBSPress.org , Accessed 20/12/11.\r\n'