U9D-AB117- Leadership in Hospitality Management

Leadership

Executive skills needed by leaders according to Hackman and Walton (1986) are: being

able to see and communicate the big picture or the end goal to others, to negotiate for needed

resources, make good decisions after consulting all available data and viewpoints, empowering

others to develop and learn, and finally to work well with a diversity of people to accomplish

goals (Hickman, 2010, p.222).

One great example of evidence of these leadership skills was former U.S. President

Abraham Lincoln. He assembled a Cabinet of people around him that were in some cases his

initial adversaries. But he knew that by having a diversity of thought, talent, and debate it would

benefit the country and his decision making. He also would tell story after story to drive home an

idea or make his argument and sway opinion to his side. Thus the public could relate to him

because these were stories they could all understand and were based on common sense, and

everyday day life. He also timed his decisions so that he would propose a new law or announce

a decision when he knew the public was ready for it and as a result they were able to accept it

(Goodwin, 2005).

As we move into the 21st century, leadership is becoming increasingly more

collaborative. As the world is becoming more globalized and thus more complex, so too is the

nature of leadership. More collaborative leadership is premised on the idea that no individual

can have all the answers and be expert at everything. Now the leader becomes more of a

facilitator to empower and motivate the team (Hickman, 2010). This type of leadership is

characterized by fostering diversity, learning, and soliciting feedback and opinions of the group,

as well as supporting their decisions. It also involves mentoring team members as well as

empowering others to lead special project or assignment teams. However, this collaborative

nature must be balanced with the need for timely decision–making as the pace of business

increases with globalization and increased productivity through the use of technology.

References

Goodwin, D.K. (2005). Team of rivals. New York, NY: Simon and Schuster.

Hackman, J.R. (2010). Leading teams: Imperatives for leaders. In G. R. Hickman (Ed.), Leading organizations: Perspectives for a new era. (pp. 206–238). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE

Hicks, D. A. (2010). Globalization. In G. R. Hickman (Ed.), Leading organizations: Perspectives for a new era. (pp. 14–20). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE

Leadership Styles

There are various leadership styles. See if you can recognize your leadership style from this list:

The Transactional Leader– Employees comply with the leader’s requests and they are judged on performance and are paid accordingly. These leaders want to change things for the better and work through their employees to accomplish the goal. A version of this style is the Task oriented leader who really discounts the team input in order to get the job done on a timely basis. The latter style results in higher turnover and absenteeism. The Autocratic Leader–An efficient style with the leader telling the employees or team what needs to be done and they are expected to do it without any questioning as to whether the action is the best way to accomplish the goals. This style can lead to high turnover but can be effective in military situations and some unskilled positions. The Charismatic versus Transformational Leader– The charismatic type of leader has a personality that inspires others. They are excited about the goals and can motivate others as a result. However, their excitement may make driven but oblivious to empowering others or to pitfalls of their strategies. Steve Jobs would be an example of a charismatic leader. When Steve Jobs was not at the company he founded– Apple, Inc., the company floundered. While the transformational leader is admired by employees and therefore influences employees behavior. These leaders are risk takers while instilling a sense of mission and zeal in their employees. These leaders coach each employee and act as a mentor to inspire and empower their employees. They provide clear guidelines for both behavior and expectations as well as goals and how to get there. But they encourage employees to be innovative in reaching those goals.

Reference Bass, B. M. & Riggio, R. E. (2010). The transformation model of leadership. In G. R. Hickman

(Ed.), Leading Organizations: Perspectives for a new era (pp.76–85). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE

Bureaucratic Leaders versus Participative Leaders versus Laissez faire leaders: Bureaucratic leaders follow the rules verbatim, which is good when the goal is safety (toxins and dangerous machinery for instance). However, this style stifles any creativity or career advancement based on anything other than abiding by the rules. The participative leader allows team decision-making and reaches team consensus to move forward, which in turn empowers the team and can lead to better decisions. The downside of this style is that it is not efficient. When time is of the essence this is not an advantageous style. The extreme version of this style can be people first type of style where the leader loses track of the goal in their quest to better the team. Laissez faire is French for, let do or act, meaning this leader really lets everyone do as they wish. It is really non–leadership. This might especially occur in a startup company where someone is designated the leader but in essence they are all deciding and doing. This is not an effective leadership style, as ultimately it leads to conflict and at worst can stymie an organization and the employees from effectively reaching their goals.

Management Style The micromanager versus the macromanager: The micromanager wants to oversee every detail and the employee feels as if the manager is constantly looking over their shoulder. The problem being that the employees feel stifled and usually under additional stress as a result. Employees can feel as if the manager does not trust them to do a good job. The macromanager however can be too hands off. This leader delegates it all but may not give instructions as to how to do it. They tend to not look at the details, sometimes until it is too late. For employees who need more direction and guidance, this can be a very frustrating experience. They want to do the job but may be unsure where to start or how to proceed or what form the project should take. Ofcourse the best version of these two styles is an amalgamation of both tendencies; to provide details initially, let employees start on the project, and then check in occasionally to see if the team needs anything, see if they are progressing satisfactorily, and provide feedback. However, some jobs require more attention to detail than others. Health professions, or in professions involving peoples’ safety and security are concerned, more attention to detail may be a necessity. But whether a manager is more inclined towards micromanaging or macromanaging, each job involves varying degrees of both styles.

Reference

Hickman, G. R. Ed. (2010). Leading organizations: Perspectives for a new era (2nd ed.).

Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE

Management style:

Micromanager < –– detail vs. larger picture ––> Macromanager

Leadership Style:

The reality is most leaders use a variety of styles at times. However, there is usually a

predominant leadership style.

Autocratic Bureaucratic Transactional Transformational Laissez faire