Leadership Style Essay

The main focus of any organization is viability or productivity (Mastrangelo, Eddy and Lorenzet, 2004). This is further heightened by the increasing changes in product securities industry activities (Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development (CIPD), 2001). The fact that consumers now begin a cleanse and affordable access to market information has brought about an profit in their market power and the resultant effect is a much ch all in allenging and competitive market especially in the private sector. The mankind sector on the other hand is under increasing pull for a more effective utilization of public funds.Consequently, the quest for a competitive advantage and progressively better military operation is becoming a major(ip) factor for consideration in virtually all organizations. In this light, the CIPD (2001) emphasized on the role of leadership as a major factor essential for an enhanced organizational performance. Taormina (2008) supported this in stating tha t in leadership is vested the ability to decide how organizations testament be run and it plays a major role in influencing the organization to success.The CIPD (2001) further added that leadership (or volume circumspection) is the main element harnessing other success factors in an organization for effectiveness. A add up of authors have also supported the foregoing discussions on the leader-success affinity (e. g Harris and Kuhnert 2008 Mastrangelo, Eddy and Lorenzet, 2004). Furthermore, seek works have identified definite channelizeers to high performance leadership. A major nonpareil among these is leadership demeanour or leadership style (Mastrangelo, Eddy and Lorenzet, 2004 Taormina, 2008).Leadership Style and organizational Success Drawing a Correlation Leadership style is i of the major traits that whitethorn be used to draw a filiation of difference in the midst of high performance and low performance organizations (Adeyemi-Bello, 2001). Since the management i n an organization has a bang-up impact on how it exit be run, the style of leadership at heart the management cycle has a way of dictating the direction that such an organization provide go. Taormina (2008) buttressed this point in his work.He established the fact that leadership behavior go along way in determining the culture or the customary atmosphere in an organization and this will in turn come to employees attitude towards performance and ultimate success of such an organization. A number of dichotomies on leadership behavior have been presented. However, leadership style whoremonger be broadly categorized into cardinal People-Centered leadership and Task-Centered leadership (Adeyemi-Bello, 2001 pg cl Taormina, 2008 pg. 87). People-Centered leadership Versus Task-Centered leadershipVarious progressive attempts have been made at investigating leadership from the behavioral angle. However, a remarkable point was reached in the 1950s with the introduction of Ohio State model which talked about task-oriented and people-oriented leadership (Taormina, 2008 pg. 87). These ii categories seem to have been a perfect wizard that describes leadership behaviors because it is pipe down being referred as at present. According to Adeyemi-Bello (2001), task-oriented style emphasizes on ware and organizational goals.This leadership style is concerned about how the organizational goals whitethorn be implemented. People-oriented leaders on the other hand show great concern for the followers (Adeyemi-Bello, 2001). They create a warm environment within the organization and foster a strong positive relationship among members of the organization. date this style offers a system that respects the personality, feelings and opinions of the employees and gives them a feeling of authorization (Taormina, 2008), task oriented approach is thirsty for achievements some terms at all be (Adeyemi-Bello, 2001).Subsequent studies after the initial presentation of these lead ership models have made attempts at differentiating between them. The intention was to determine which one should be preferred above the other. However, Adeyemi-Bello (2001) explained that current researches have shown that preferences for any of the two styles bet on the current situation within the organization. There are causes where one style will fail to impact a good result, non because it is less effective but because the situation at hand does non create an environment conducive for its functionality (Mastrangelo, Eddy and Lorenzet, 2004).Furthermore, Jacques, Garger and Thomas (2008) remarked that the recent behavioral theory of leadership took the studies a step further by suggesting that the two behavioral approaches will be more effective when adequately amalgamate under any given situation. Their paper revealed that graduates of project management performs better in leadership than those from another management related courses because of their ability to integrate the two leadership styles a training that the other group did not receive. Adeyemi-Bello (2001) had earlier presented this fact in her work.The result of her survey on 29 Baptist church leaders shows a better result when the two styles were combine in church leadership than when each one was singly adopted. She reason out for the extension of these results into leadership in other realms of human activities. The implications of these results are instead obvious. A paradigm shift in the content and delivery of leadership training programs has become very necessary. The current training inculcating strategic cookery and tasks-focused practices should pave way for a more balanced approach in management training.People managers should also learn to engage in a better interpersonal relationship with those under them, create a tepid environment conducive for a healthy work relationship, and engage in strategies that will give employees a feeling of empowerment (Adeyemi-Bello, 2001 M onstarangelo, Eddy and Lorenzet, 2004 Taormina, 2008). The case of Kleine Plastics in the UK presented by Ludlow (1987) serves as a good example in driving home the points that has been raised so far (in Tyson and Kakabadse eds. ).The work contrasted between the leadership attributes of Joseph Kleine, the founder of Kleine Plastics and that of David, his son at a particular time during the early stages of the companys development. It reviews Joseph Kleines attitude as a charismatic leader with whom his managers and work force wish to identify (pg. 23). He engages a style that trusted and respected his employees and empathizes with their situations. To him, these people were his main assets. This, mate with his result oriented tendencies, propelled the work force towards a high performance level.However, David Kleine could not maintain this approach when he had to stand in during his captures absence. He wanted result at all cost without due regards for his team members. Objections to his propositions by his managers were downplayed no matter how genuine they may be. Though work was still progressing, enthusiasm and productivity level dwindled. The increase of Joseph was welcomed with protests from every quarter. David style was found to be less effective because of its escape of human face.Conclusion Leadership style is an issue that will still continue to be a subject of interest among research workers. The world is ever changing and people are becoming increasingly dynamic in attitude and thinking. This calls for a leadership approach that will keep up with the pace of the changes. A dynamic leader is one that is better equipped to respond to changes and easily enlist the cooperation of people in managing them effectively towards a greater level of production performance.