Organisational Behaviour: The Personal Nature of Leadership Essay

The title of this paper inspires examination of leadership style within the corporate culture with regard to personal traits in relation to organisational behaviour. The old standard of a leader being born rather than made is under review here as many concepts come into play when discussing modern corporate leadership. Many would argue and research reflects (Goleman, D. , Boyatzis, R. , & McKee, A. 2001) leaders adjust style according to situations. A situation is just one influence affecting one’s leadership capabilities. The organisational culture brings into play a myriad of factors that affect leadership. Stogdill (1948/1974) built the foundation for modern leadership where creative thinking and flexibility become key because personality became central to understanding situations found in corporate culture. Stogdill writes â€Å"no personal characteristics are predictive of leadership seems to over-emphasise the situational and underestimate the personal nature of leadership† (p. 35—check your book for ref). Research into the history of leadership lends another view entirely. Such researchers of leadership and organisational behaviours as Boddy and Burns find early on the icon of leadership was based on an egalitarian view of the best â€Å"man† for the job. Stogdill found different views but related findings to behaviour. Now many years later, is the nature of leadership based in situations? Or is it based in one’s personal experience and choices in reacting to certain situations? I believe the face of corporate culture has changed because of certain factors present today in the business world. Today, gender, race and other demographic factors play a large role in management. How people interact and how these demographics influence the behaviour of the organisation needs to be examined because this makes the culture. In today’s business world because competition is fierce, anything innovative and flexible to opening up channels of creativity is seen as a positive. Organisational culture is born out of an organisation’s core values and beliefs in completing its objectives (Robbins 2001, p. 544). This can also be said of people as a culture within race, religion and creed. How an organisation takes external factors like an individual’s demographic can be a complex task. How people perceive his or her is directly influenced by his or her personal experiences and make-up. In this respect because of globalization and multiculturalism, an organisation needs to be flexible to outside influences within reason. This means than an organisational culture has the means of redefining itself as more people join. Of course the organisation must conscious that these factors are at work and this means sticking to the core values. In this respect, I must agree with Stogdill’s statement because the human experience, these demographics touched upon above, makes one’s personality and makes culture personal. It makes the act of leading based from one’s experience and therefore, very personal. One can see such proof within the literature but really one’s personal experience and how they use these traits builds character and influences many areas of organisational behaviour such as tools for motivation, team-building and creative thinking. Personal Nature of Leadership The personal connection begins at a fundamental level of human sociology where the use of story is central. Howard Gardner (1995) reflects, â€Å"the ultimate impact of the leader depends most significantly on the particular story that he or she relates or embodies, and the receptions to that story on the part of the audiences† (p. 14). By telling stories, allows for a certain level of openness or vulnerability on the part of the leader and makes them human. By opening the line of communication, gives the employee knowledge of their environment and develops trust. The leader’s role is to sell the idea of commitment within a culture. Odiorne (1987) suggests, â€Å"if employees know what is expected, and what help and resources are available, they can then be relied upon to govern their actions to achieve the commitments they have made† (p. 138). This sets the stage for goals and achieving high performance. The culture in turn feeds off this energy and excitement. Bennis (1989) writes: There are three reasons why leaders are important. First they are responsible for the effectiveness of organizations. Second, the change and upheaval of past years has left us with no place to hide. We need anchors in our lives as a guiding purpose. Third, there is a national concern about integrity of our institutions. Being mindful of own context is difficult for us. (p. 15-16) Managers with a keen understanding of leading represent these three key attributes and create a foundation from which to act. A leader must also display curiosity and have the guts to be daring. This requires someone to make a choice based upon his or her ability to risk take. They must be a dominant force within the team. Bennis (1989) reflects, there are two kinds of people â€Å"those who are paralyzed by fear, and those who are afraid but go ahead away. Life is not about limitation but options† (p. 185). A healthy culture inspires options and the innovations that grow out of creativity. Research discovered that leaders use different leadership styles for different situations because of emotional intelligence and its tie to strengths or weaknesses in personal traits. In the book Primal Leadership, authors David Goleman, Richard Boyatzis , and Annie McKee (2001) present their research on leadership styles within the organisational structure. The research discusses the relationship that these executives have with their emotional intelligence. Emotional intelligence is the study of emotions and their impact upon the work environment. The research investigates the different leadership styles evident in most organisations today. Mainly, leaders were categorized as either having the visionary, coaching, affiliative, democratic, pacesetting, or commanding leadership styles. Among these, only pacesetting and commanding are assessed to be less effective than the other leadership styles. Emotional Intelligence relies upon the fact the leader will be able to have a competent level of interaction with the employee by changing leadership styles and adapting to each unique situation throughout the time at work. It reflects successful leadership by allowing for complex relationships for team members by recognizing relationship building, capacity of visions and personal development. Emotional Intelligence for a leader means being able to read people, be read and allow for open dialogue. Research stresses the importance of the leader’s flexibility and capability to adapt to his or her environment. An effective leader will understand not only their environment and people but also understand the potential for impact upon that environment. By understanding this key element, an effective leader will know how to define the environment. This is important because employees look to management for guidance. The leader defines the boundaries for the team and created an atmosphere for building relationships and open communication. This in turn creates stronger teams. Team Building For managers who put his or her people first; they are more focused on nurturing and training. Research suggests leaders are more interested in mentoring and training their team rather than focusing on output of numbers or turn around time. This development in team building allows for â€Å"providing people opportunities to learn from their work rather than taking them away from their work to learn† (Hughes 2004, p. 4). A healthy culture inspires options and the innovations that grow out of creativity. Still one could not ignore times of fear. Management sometimes creates fear on purpose or misused it to work employees harder. This does not create positive outcomes but promoted conflict and an unstable team. It is clear for management to be successful; it must communicate its vision but also create positive reinforcement (See Figure 1. ). Once key members understand people’s needs, then action could be taken to improve management’s role. Only then would a leader be taken seriously. Recognizing positive traits in a team member built trust, integrity and also met an important need while building a team.