Leadership Style Essay

The main focus of any organization is viability or productiveness (Mastrangelo, Eddy and Lorenzet, 2004). This is further heightened by the increasing changes in product market activities (Chartered Institute of Personnel and outgrowth (CIPD), 2001). The fact that consumers now bring on a better and affordable access to market information has brought to the highest degree an increase in their market power and the resultant effect is a more ch aloneenging and agonistical market especially in the private sector. The public sector on the other hand is infra increasing pressure for a more effective utilization of public funds.Consequently, the quest for a war-ridden advantage and increasingly better performance is becoming a study factor for consideration in virtually all organizations. In this light, the CIPD (2001) emphasized on the role of leading as a major factor essential for an enhanced organizational performance. Taormina (2008) supported this in stating that in leadersh ip is vested the ability to fix how organizations entrust be run and it plays a major role in influencing the organization to success.The CIPD (2001) further added that leadership (or mountain management) is the main element harnessing other success factors in an organization for effectiveness. A number of authors generate also supported the foregoing discussions on the leader-success alliance (e. g Harris and Kuhnert 2008 Mastrangelo, Eddy and Lorenzet, 2004). Furthermore, research buy the farms become identified certain pointers to high performance leadership. A major i among these is leadership behavior or leadership style (Mastrangelo, Eddy and Lorenzet, 2004 Taormina, 2008).Leadership Style and Organizational Success Drawing a coefficient of correlation Leadership style is wiz of the major traits that may be used to draw a origination of difference between high performance and low performance organizations (Adeyemi-Bello, 2001). Since the management in an organizatio n has a great impact on how it will be run, the style of leadership within the management motorcycle has a way of dictating the direction that such an organization will go. Taormina (2008) buttressed this point in his work.He established the fact that leadership behavior go along way in determining the nicety or the prevailing atmosphere in an organization and this will in turn affect employees view towards performance and ultimate success of such an organization. A number of dichotomies on leadership behavior have been presented. However, leadership style can be broadly categorized into two 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 behavioural angle. However, a remarkable point was reached in the 1950s with the introduction of Ohio State model which talked some task-oriented a nd people-oriented leadership (Taormina, 2008 pg. 87). These two categories seem to have been a perfect one that describes leadership behaviors because it is thus far being referred as at present. According to Adeyemi-Bello (2001), task-oriented style emphasizes on production and organizational goals.This leadership style is tincted about how the organizational goals may be implemented. People-oriented leaders on the other hand show great concern for the followers (Adeyemi-Bello, 2001). They pass water a warm environment within the organization and foster a vehement positive relationship among members of the organization. While this style offers a system that respects the personality, feelings and opinions of the employees and gives them a feeling of authority (Taormina, 2008), task oriented hail is thirsty for achievements sometimes at all cost (Adeyemi-Bello, 2001).Subsequent studies afterwards the initial presentation of these leadership models have made attempts at differ entiating between them. The intention was to determine which one should be preferred above the other. However, Adeyemi-Bello (2001) explained that latest researches have shown that preferences for any of the two styles depend on the trustworthy situation within the organization. There are cases where one style will fail to impact a good result, not because it is little effective but because the situation at hand does not 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 measuring rod further by suggesting that the two behavioral approaches will be more effective when adequately immingle under any given situation. Their paper revealed that graduates of project management performs better in leadership than those from another(prenominal) management related courses because of their ability to blend the two leadership s tyles a training that the other separate 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 combined in church leadership than when each one was singly adopted. She concluded for the extension of these results into leadership in other realms of human activities. The implications of these results are quite obvious. A paradigm shift in the content and delivery of leadership training programs has become very necessary. The current training inculcating strategic planning and tasks-focused practices should pave way for a more balanced approach in management training.People managers should also learn to deal in a better interpersonal relationship with those under them, create a warmer environment conducive for a healthy work relationship, and engage in strategies that will give employees a feeling of empowerment (Adeyemi-Bello, 2001 Monstarangelo, 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 utmost (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 archean stages of the companys development. It reviews Joseph Kleines attitude as a charismatic leader with whom his managers and work extract 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, pair 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 fathers absence. He wanted result at all cost without due regards for his team members. Objections to his proposi tions by his managers were downplayed no matter how genuine they may be. Though work was still progressing, enthusiasm and productivity level dwindled. The return of Joseph was welcomed with protests from every quarter. David style was found to be less effective because of its lack 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 oppose to changes and easily enlist the cooperation of people in managing them effectively towards a greater level of production performance.