Assignment 1

(Source: Daft, 2008)

Chart Concepts Detailed

Decade(s) 1950-60 (Post War Growth)

Theories: Great Man/Trait

Scholars reviewed the idea of whether leadership was inherent to the individual rather than a learned skill. Although the conclusion was that leadership was natural rather than learned, the examination of common characteristics found in “great” leaders led others to suggest that imitation by those not as gifted might prove valuable to business leaders (Source: Boundless, 2016).

Organizational Structure

Traditional Business Structure in the 1950’s to 60’s focused on the leader at the top with everyone reporting to him (literally). Size and simplicity made control by one person easy. The owner was positioned at the top with everyone else spread out under the owner (Source: Daft, 2008).

Leader View

A leader was a single hero who saw the big picture and how it fit together. Leaders directed the big picture, and coordinated and controlled activities. A leader both managed and led the organization (Source: Boundless, 2016).

Environment

Post-War and Depression era - this decade saw the emergence of American business as leaders in the economy both here and abroad. The focus was on rebuilding and growth. Competitive advantage was open to all. Stability was the watchword. (Source: Daft, 2008).

Decade(s) 1960-80 (Multinational Emergence)

Theories: Behavior, Contingency

Scholars reviewed the idea that while certain characteristics were important in evaluating the effectiveness of the leader, the behavior of the leader manifested success as well. Leaders with high energy, strong personalities and self-confidence seemed to produce more from employees than those who were introverted and hesitant. Studies also showed that leaders who motivated employees rather than punished them succeeded more often. The contingency theorists were also contributors to leadership theory in these decades. Through an examination of leadership studies, Stodgill and Mann, main proponents of the Contingency theory, noted that while common traits existed among successful leaders, evidence suggested that leaders who are successful in one situation many not be successful in another (Source: Boundless, 2016).

Organizational Structure

Rapid post war growth and the development of new raw production materials such as plastic expanded the capacity of products and increased the size of organizations. Post war relationships with businesses overseas also gave America a greater market place for their goods. Size, distance, variety and types of goods produced brought organizations into an era in which the position, not the leader, dominated how decisions were made and who made them. Large companies with many positions created a hierarchy of leadership with bureaucratic procedures and processes making the company run. The structures were vertical and not dependent on the “single hero” to complete the tasks (Source: Daft, 2008)

Leader View

The rise of the rational leader was prevalent in this era. This person directs and controls the work using an impersonal approach.  Employees were expected to obey commands given from above while following all the rules and procedures. Thinking outside the box was not encouraged. The position the leader held denoted the authority held and just how far their ability to get the job done extended (Source: Daft, 2008;Boundless, 2016).

Environment

The focus was on growth… the bigger the company, the better the economies of scale. Post war exposure to other market places afforded American business the opportunities for bigger and varied growth.  Bigger American multinational companies dominated the world economy promoting stability at home. The leader could carefully analyze the company’s position in the market and develop plans to create a competitive advantage knowing there was a stable environment (Source: Daft, 2008).

Decade(s) 1980-2000 (Invasion of the Japanese)

Theories: Influence

The onslaught of the Japanese business models into American business study provided a new perspective for theorists. The Japanese models focused on position, power and influence. Power and influence theories of leadership are based on the different ways that leaders use power and influence to get things done. These theories describe the psychology of what makes people work and develop leadership styles that increase their productivity. There are three main Schools of Thought related to power and influence, transactional, transformational, and French and Raven’s five forms of power and Influence. Transactional leadership views the leader as a person who seeks to reward others. The assumption is that people do work for the reward and thus to be a successful leader means designing rewards and punishments that seek to promote work. The Transformational School of Thought suggests that the leader motivates and influences others by developing a working vision that promotes motivating employees. Transformational leaders are role models and inspirational in their use of the vision. Finally, French and Raven’s Five Forms of Power and Influence focused on positional and personal power. A leader can influence others by using position and personal power to motivate and empower. The leader is encouraged to develop their personal influence to become “expert” power, much like the example of Juan Carlos mentioned earlier.

Understanding the concept of influence was important because research showed that change was not successful unless people wanted the change. Organizational structures and cultures had to change if they were to compete with the Japanese (Source: Mind tools, 2016).

Organizational Structure

This time was confusing with respect to American business structure. The Japanese horizontal model with cross-team decision-making and job descriptions caused downsizing, restructuring and re-engineering of quality programs. Empowerment, the authority to make decisions, of employees to motivate became a vehicle used to get a better and more complete work product capable of competing with the Japanese (Source: Daft, 2008).

Leader View

Leaders were team leaders and change experts. The primary task of a leader was to create and implement change to bring about organizations and products that could compete with new global multinational corporations from other countries. The leader had to use influence rather than position and control because experience showed that employees needed to be motivated to change and they needed to want the change. Workers were to be valued for their expertise and decision making shared with teams rather than one person alone. Open communication among the leaders and organization was a leader’s watchword. Closed doors were opened and solid walls replaced with glass (Source: Daft, 2008).

Environment

The business landscape of these decades focused on the unseating of America and Europe as the leaders in business. The world was no longer stable. The OPEC oil embargo of 1972 and the success of the Japanese in the Electronics and Car markets forced leaders to focus on new areas of competition. Dominant American companies were no longer leaders of quality and price in the marketplace. Leaders floundered in the dark seeking to find changes that would them to compete (Source: Daft, 2008).

Decade(s) 2000-Now (The Digital Disruption)

Theories: Relational

Relational theorists viewed leadership as a relational and ethical process of people together attempting to accomplish positive change. Relational leadership is more of a philosophy than a theory of leadership. Leaders lead by knowing - by knowing and being engaged in the process of learning; being- aware of themselves and others by being a person the leader wants others to be, and; doing- acting upon the values and ideas of the group. The knowing-being-doing model represents a holistic approach to the leadership development of yourself and others (Source: National Leadership for Leadership Programs, 2016).

Organizational Structure: Flat

Flat structures are designed to encourage collaboration between the top management in direct contact with the frontline employees and customers. This action calls for the elimination of middle management. Flat organizations benefit from the advantages of small companies like faster response time to changing environmental conditions and customer demands (Business Dictionary, n.d.).

Leader View: Role Model

Leaders are role models. The learning leader, the 21st century leader emphasizes relationships, teams, empowerment and influence through vision and values rather than power and control. Leaders are flexible in mind, embrace innovation, are continually learning, and changing in both their personal and professional lives. They also encourage those around them to do the same (Source: Daft, 2008).

Environment: Digital Disruption

Fueled by the disruption of the digital age the 21st business environment is controlled by the fast pace nature of global change. Remaining competitive in a global market place requires the leader to know not only the business they inhabit, but their competitors and customers. Success in the marketplace comes from understanding the role of scarcity of resources and people’s needs. The time is chaotic calling for constant adaptability (Source: Futures Company, 2016).

References:

Boundless. (2016, May 26). Four theories of leadership. (Version 9).  Boundless Management. Retrieved from https://www.boundless.com/management/textbooks/boundless-management-textbook/leadership-9/defining-leadership-68/four-theories-of-leadership-344-7580/ Business Dictionary ( n.d.). Flat organization. Retrieved from http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/flat-organization.html

Daft, R. L. (2008). The leadership experience (5th ed.). Mason, OH: South-western Cengage Learning, Mason, OH