It is believed by many that, individually, leadership style is motivated by myriad variables. These include: organizational
mission, personal career goals, cultural issues and a host of others.
The choice of leadership style, however, is often developed over many
years as conditions of employment, long-term organizational goals and
business culture change. It is often overlooked that a fairly static choice
of leadership style, while effective over long periods, is less effective in
the short term, as specific goals and project need change, and as
Winston states "leaders have different motives at work at different
times". This article argues that short-term leadership style is, motivated less
by the desired outcomes of the leader as an individual, and more by
the conditions the leader deems as necessary to accomplish specific,
short-term organizational goals. These short-term goals often require
the leader to sacrifice personal time, family time and recreation, as
well as set aside the long-term planning and focus of the organization,
and narrow the focus, for a limited time, on very specific objectives.
Certain projects may require the normally participative leader to delegate
most tasks if, e.g., geographical distance is an issue. On the other hand,
a normally authoritarian leader may need to participate with
employees, when a project requires more "hands-on" work than what is
typical for the organization. The reality is that leaders must be flexible
and agile, particularly when handling short-term, high-stress
projects, emergencies or other events outside the norm for the organization.
Furthermore, this article addresses how an organizations' ad-hoc needs
motivate the leader to choose a leadership style, such as defined by
Clark as, "authoritarian, participative and delegative", that may or may not
be typical or suitable for long-term needs.
According to Norton, "Organizations may have hundreds or
thousands of variables that are vital for success", because of the many
organizations, or departments within a larger organization, which
require an authoritarian style of leadership. This leadership style, which
lends itself best to structured, bureaucratic organizations, is highly
effective in large corporations, like General Electric, IBM and General
Motors. These organizations desire, and often require, control over
employees to ensure productivity, accountability and compliance. Laws,
such as the Sarbanes Oxley Act of
2002, have increased the pressure on
large, publicly traded firms to exercise control over even minor parts
of operations. With employees of these large companies numbering
in tens of thousands or more, control must be exercised in such a way
so as to limit the variables, the company must deal with in daily
operations, ensuring full compliance to regulatory agencies and the
public alike. This powerful motivation does not allow much flexibility
for leaders, requiring them to adopt a conservative, autocratic
approach with their followers. |
