LEADERSHIP

A process that influences other people to achieve an objective and guides the company in a way to make it more coherent and cohesive is called leadership. You can also define leadership as a process of leading people in the right direction in order to achieve goals.

LEADERSHIP STYLES

Leadership style is the manner and approach of providing direction, implementing plans, and motivating people.

Whether you are managing a team at work, captaining your sports team or leading a major corporation, your leadership style is crucial to your success. Consciously, or subconsciously, you will no doubt use some of the leadership styles. The style that individuals use will be based on a combination of their beliefs and values and preferences , as well as the organizational culture and norms. The leadership styles we look at here are:

1. Autocratic leadership
2. Bureaucratic leadership
3. Charismatic leadership
4. Democratic leadership
5. Laissez faire leadership
6. people oriented leadership
7. Servant leadership
8. Task-oriented leadership
9. Transactional leadership
10. Transformational leadership
11. Situational Leadership

1. Autocratic Leadership: This is often considered the classical approach. It is one in which the manager retains as much power and decision-making authority as possible. The manager does not consult employees, nor are they allowed to give any input. Employees are expected to obey orders without receiving any explanations. The motivation environment is produced by creating a structured set of rewards and punishments.

2. Bureaucratic Leadership: Bureaucratic leadership is where the manager manages “by the book¨ everything must be done according to procedure or policy. If it isn’t covered by the book, the manager refers to the next level above him or her. This manager is really more of a police officer than a leader. He or she enforces the rules. This is a very appropriate style for work involving serious safety risks (such as working with machinery, with toxic substances or at heights) or where large sums of money are involved (such as cash-handling).

3. Charismatic Leadership: A charismatic leadership style can appear similar to a transformational leadership style, in that the leader injects huge doses of enthusiasm into his or her team, and is very energetic in driving others forward. The Charismatic Leader gathers followers through dint of personality and charm, rather than any form of external power or authority. It is interesting to watch a Charismatic Leader ‘working the room’ as they move from person to person. They pay much attention to the person they are talking to at any one moment, making that person feel like they are, for that time, the most important person in the world.

4. Democratic Leadership Style: The democratic leadership style is also called the participative style as it encourages employees to be a part of the decision making. The democratic manager keeps his or her employees informed about everything that affects their work and shares decision making and problem solving responsibilities. This style requires the leader to be a coach who has the final say, but gathers information from staff members before making a decision. Democratic leadership can produce high quality and high quantity work for long periods of time.

5. Laissez-Faire Leadership Style: This French phrase means “leave it be” and is used to describe a leader who leaves his or her colleagues to get on with their work. It can be effective if the leader monitors what is being achieved and communicates this back to his or her team regularly. The laissez-faire leadership style is also known as the “hands-off¨ style. It is one in which the manager provides little or no direction and gives employees as much freedom as possible. All authority or power is given to the employees and they must determine goals, make decisions, and resolve problems on their own. Most often, laissez-faire leadership works for teams in which the individuals are very experienced and skilled self-starters.

6. People-Oriented Leadership or Relations-Oriented Leadership: This style of leadership is the opposite of task-oriented leadership: the leader is totally focused on organizing, supporting and developing the people in the leader’s team. A participative style, it tends to lead to good teamwork and creative collaboration. However, taken to extremes, it can lead to failure to achieve the team’s goals.

7. Servant Leadership: The servant leader serves others, rather than others serving the leader. Serving others thus comes by helping them to achieve and improve. When someone, at any level within an organization, leads simply by virtue of meeting the needs of his or her team, he or she is described as a “leader”. In many ways, servant leadership is a form of democratic leadership, as the whole team tends to be involved in decision-making. The leader has responsibility for the followers. Leaders have a responsibility towards society and those who are disadvantaged. People who want to help others best do this by leading them.

8. Task-Oriented Leadership: A highly task-oriented leader focuses only on getting the job done, and can be quite autocratic. He or she will actively define the work and the roles required, put structures in place, plan, organize and monitor. However, as task-oriented leaders spare little thought for the well-being of their teams, this approach can suffer many of the flaws of autocratic leadership, with difficulties in motivating and retaining staff. Task-oriented leaders can benefit from an understanding of the Blake-Mouton Managerial Grid, which can help them identify specific areas for development that will help them involve people more.

9. Transactional Leadership: The transactional leader works through creating clear structures whereby it is clear what is required of their subordinates, and the rewards that they get for following orders. Punishments are not always mentioned, but they are also well-understood and formal systems of discipline are usually in place.

10. Transformational Leadership: A person with this leadership style is a true leader who inspires his or her team with a shared vision of the future. Transformational leaders are highly visible, and spend a lot of time communicating. They don’t necessarily lead from the front, as they tend to delegate responsibility amongst their teams. While their enthusiasm is often infectious, they can need to be supported by “detail people”. Working for a Transformational Leader can be a wonderful and uplifting experience. They put passion and energy into everything. They care about you and want you to succeed.

11. Using the Right Style-Situational Leadership: While the Transformation Leadership approach is often a highly effective style to use in business, there is no one “right” way to lead or manage that suits all situations. When a decision is needed, an effective leader does not just fall into a single preferred style, such as using transactional or transformational methods. In practice, as they say, things are not that simple.

Appropriate Style of Leadership for 21st Century:

A good leader will find him or herself switching instinctively between styles according to the people and work they are dealing with. This is often referred to as “situational leadership”. For example, the manager of an “Avalon Aviation Academy” trains new candidates using a bureaucratic style to ensure operatives know the procedures that achieve the right standards of product quality and workplace safety. The same manager may adopt a more participative style of leadership when working on production line improvement with his or her team of supervisors.

There are some forces that influence the style to be used after assessing the questions:

• How much time is available?
• Are relationships based on respect and trust or on disrespect?
• Who has the information – you, your employees, or both?
• How well your employees are trained and how well you know the task.
• Internal conflicts.
• Stress levels.
• Type of task. Is it structured, unstructured, complicated, or simple?

As the new era has been started with the advancement in the technology field and there is no single style is better in 21st century. The best leadership style of 21st century would be the mix of all or some of the above stated styles as per the scenario of the organization. Even selecting the appropriate style for leadership these qualities should be in the leader to manage the organization. A good leader uses all the above styles, depending on what forces are involved between the followers, the leader, and the situation. Some examples include:

• Using an authoritarian style on a new employee who is just learning the job. The leader is competent and a good coach. The employee is motivated to learn a new skill. The situation is a new environment for the employee.
• Using a participative style with a team of workers who know their job. The leader knows the problem, but does not have all the information. The employees know their jobs and want to become part of the team.
• Using a delegative style with a worker who knows more about the job than you. You cannot do everything! The employee needs to take ownership of her job. Also, the situation might call for you to be at other places, doing other things.
• Using all three: Telling your employees that a procedure is not working correctly and a new one must be established (authoritarian). Asking for their ideas and input on creating a new procedure (participative). Delegating tasks in order to implement the new procedure (delegative).

The most appropriate mix of leadership styles is Democratic, Servant and Transformational Leadership. The most using style in all the organization of the world. But there are also some situations where the leadership style is successful in each situation. These are followings:

• In some situations, an autocratic or authoritarian style is appropriate:
• In critical situations, where one leader is required
• When the leader has specific knowledge that others do not
• In some situations, a delegative style is appropriate:
• If a team member knows more than you do about a task
• When work loads and deadlines are pressing (shared success builds team cohesion)
• In most situations, a participative style is appropriate:
• Especially when team members understand the objectives and their role in the task
• To gain engagement and buy-in from all team members (it is noted that participative decision making is different to participative leadership and not always possible)

Question: How come a leader can be effective in one organization move to another and seems to fail miserably discuss?

A good leader is one who does not simply control his team members. Instead he sets himself as a role model. The task of the leader is to take the people from where they are to where they have not been. A leader need not be a superman.

These are the following situation in which different style of leadership fail. The reasons behind these are

Autocratic Leadership Style: It is the most effective style to use in these situations:-

• New, untrained employees who do not know which tasks to perform or which procedures to follow
• Effective supervision can be provided only through detailed orders and instructions
• Employees do not respond to any other leadership style
• There are high-volume production needs on a daily basis
• There is limited time in which to make a decision
• A manager’s power is challenged by an employee
• The area was poorly managed
• Work needs to be coordinated with another department or organization

But is it will be miserably failed in these situations in the same organization or in the different organization

• Employees become tense, fearful, or resentful
• Employees expect to have their opinions heard
• Employees begin depending on their manager to make all their decisions
• There is low employee morale, high turnover and absenteeism and work stoppage

Democratic Leadership Style: The democratic leadership style is most effective when

• The leader wants to keep employees informed about matters that affect them.
• The leader wants employees to share in decision-making and problem-solving duties.
• The leader wants to provide opportunities for employees to develop a high sense of personal growth and job satisfaction.
• There is a large or complex problem that requires lots of input to solve.
• Changes must be made or problems solved that affect employees or groups of employees.
• You want to encourage team building and participation.

Democratic leadership style should be failed badly in these circumstances where

• There is not enough time to get everyone’s input.
• It’s easier and more cost-effective for the manager to make the decision.
• The business can’t afford mistakes.
• The manager feels threatened by this type of leadership.
• Employee safety is a critical concern.

Bureaucratic Leadership: This style can be effective when the organization of this type.

• Employees are performing routine tasks over and over.
• Employees need to understand certain standards or procedures.
• Employees are working with dangerous or delicate equipment that requires a definite set of procedures to operate.
• Safety or security training is being conducted.
• Employees are performing tasks that require handling cash.

This style is ineffective in organizational environments where

• Work habits form that is hard to break, especially if they are no longer useful.
• Employees lose their interest in their jobs and in their fellow workers.
• Employees do only what is expected of them and no more.

Laissez-Faire Leadership Style: This is an effective style where behavior of employees in an organization is like these

• Employees are highly skilled, experienced, and educated.
• Employees have pride in their work and the drive to do it successfully on their own.
• Outside experts, such as staff specialists or consultants are being used
• Employees are trustworthy and experienced.

This style should seem failed when the following situations falls.

• It makes employees feel insecure at the unavailability of a manager.
• The manager cannot provide regular feedback to let employees know how well they are doing.
• Managers are unable to thank employees for their good work.
• The manager doesn’t understand his or her responsibilities and is hoping the employees can cover for him or her.

Situational Leadership: These are the most effective approach for you in a situation where;

• The skill levels and experience of the members of your team.
• The work involved (routine or new and creative).
• The organizational environment (stable or radically changing, conservative or adventurous).
• You own preferred or natural style.

Question: Compare and contrast the leadership of Tony Blair and Pervaiz Musharraf.Use relevant course module in your discussion. Do you think these leaders can continue their success? Give reasons.

Tony Blair as a Democratic Leader

Tony Blair (Anthony Charles Lynton Blair) was born in May 6, 1953, Edinburgh, Scotland but spent much of his childhood in Durham, England. He studied law at Oxford and then practiced law until 1983. Blair was soon a rising Leader of what became known as the “new Labour” movement, with positions more centrist on fiscal affairs and social issues like crime. He became leader of the Labour Party in 1994, and three years later Blair was 44, making him the youngest British prime minister since Lord Liverpool in 1812. Blair was re-elected in Parliamentary elections in 2001 and 2005.

He has always described himself as a social democrat and no doubt.he is a democratic leader of Labour Party. He led the party to victories in the 1997, 2001, and 2005 elections. He made several decisions with the mutual consulting of his party and with the coordination of opposition party.

Blair’s government implemented a number decision in his regime as listed below

• 1997 manifesto pledges,
• Introducing the minimum wage, Human Rights Act
• Freedom of Information Act
• Regional devolution,
• Establishing the Scottish Parliament,
• The National Assembly for Wales,
• The Northern Ireland Assembly.
• Control of interest rates to the Bank of England,
• Good Friday Agreement.
• War on Terror in 2001 invasion of Afghanistan and 2003 invasion of Iraq. In his first six years, Blair had British troops ordered into battle five times
• Rights for gay people in the Civil Partnership Act 2004

Tony Blair as Prime Minister has played a significant role in

• Foreign Policy

Blair argued that the relation with US is in Britain’s interest to “protect and strengthen the bond” regardless of who is in the White House. However, one-sided compromising personal and political closeness tends to serious discussion of the term “Poodle-ism” in the media.

• Security policy

Blair introduced anti-terrorism and ID card legislation.Under Blair’s government the amount of new legislation increased which attracted criticism. Blair increased police powers by adding to the number of arrestable offences, compulsory DNA recording and the use of dispersal orders.

Relationship as a Democratic Leader :

Tony Blair made relation with the UK parliament and other world role as a democratic leader

Relationship with Parliament

As a diplomatic leader,he replaced the then twice-weekly 15-minute sessions of Prime Minister’s Questions held on Tuesdays and Thursdays with a single 30-minute session on Wednesdays. In addition to PMQs, Blair held monthly press conferences at which he fielded questions from journalists.

Relation with other leaders of World

Blair had a deep feeling for Israel as he born in part from his faith. Blair met Michael Levy a pop music mogul and fundraiser. He had been cool towards the right-wing Netanyahu governmenta and Ehud Barak, with whom Blair forged a close relationship. He also ‘responded positively to Arafat, whom he had met thirteen times since becoming prime minister’, ‘regarding him as essential to future negotiations.

Blair forged friendships with several conservative European leaders, including Silvio Berlusconi of Italy, Angela Merkel of Germany and more recently Nicolas Sarkozy of France.

Post-Prime Ministerial career

Diplomacy

After resignation from his post of Prim minister he also served as a leader in the diplomatic envoy in Middle East for the United Nations, European Union, United States, and Russia. In May 2008, Tony Blair announced a new plan for peace and for Palestinian rights, based heavily on the ideas of the Peace Valley plan.

Private sector

In January 2008, it was confirmed that Blair would be joining investment bank JPMorgan Chase in a “senior advisory capacity” and that he would advise Zurich Financial Services on climate change. Blair also gives lectures for a 90-minute speech. Yale University announced on 7 March 2008 that Blair will teach a course on issues of faith and globalisation at the Yale Schools of Management and Divinity as a Howland distinguished fellow during the 2008-09 academic year

Charity

On 14 November 2007, Blair launched the Tony Blair Sports Foundation, which aims to “increase childhood participation in sports activities, especially in the North East of England, where a larger proportion of children are socially excluded, and to promote overall health and prevent childhood obesity.”

Honours

Blair is presented with the Presidential Medal of Freedom by President George W. Bush.

On 22 May 2008, Blair received an honorary law doctorate from Queen’s University Belfast for distinction in public service and roles in the Northern Ireland peace process.

On 13 January 2009, Blair was awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom by President George W. Bush in recognition of exemplary achievement and to convey the utmost esteem of the American people, War on Terror and his role in achieving peace in Northern Ireland.

Downfall of Blair Leadership

Blair has no doubut a good leader ship qualities as a democratic leader but due to some decesion made in his tenur of Prime minister,the graph of his popularity go down.

1. Relation with US Government

As the United Kingdom has its own place in the world but due to one sided relation with US government the, Blair was criticized by the public as well as other (Media & Foreign leader).

• Nelson Mandela said that Blair as “the U.S. foreign minister”. Blair has also often openly been referred to as “Bush’s poodle”.
• Kendall Myers, a senior analyst at the State Department, reportedly said that he felt “a little ashamed” of Bush’s treatment of the Prime Minister and that his attempts to influence U.S. policy were typically ignored:
• Anthony Seldon revealing conversation between Bush and Blair, with the former addressing the latter as “Yo, Blair” was recorded when they did not know.
• Blair was sometimes paying insufficient attention both to the views of his own Cabinet colleagues and to those of the House of Commons.Due to this,he was criticised as not that of a prime minister and head of government, which he was, but of a president and head of state-which he was not.
• Nobel prizewinning playwright Harold Pinter and former Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathir Mohammad, have accused Blair of “war crimes”.

2. Invasion of Iraq

The participation in the invasion on Iraq in 2003 due to the reason the weapons of mass destruction.Blair strongly supported United States foreign policy rarding invasion of Iraq. As a result, he faced criticism over the policy itself and the circumstances in which it was decided upon-especially his claims that Iraq was developing weapons of mass destruction, which have not been discovered.

3. Israel-Lebanon Conflict

Blair was criticized for his failure to immediately call for a ceasefire in the 2006 Israel-Lebanon conflict, with members of his cabinet openly criticizing Israel. Jack Straw, the Leader of the House of Commons and former Foreign Secretary stated that Israel’s actions risked destabilizing all of Lebanon. Significant number of ministers pressured Blair to publicly criticize Israel over the scale of deaths and destruction in Lebanon.

Yes, of course this leader can continue their success by using these;

• Keep communication open: If the marketplace of ideas is going to be open for business, everyone needs to feel comfortable enough to put their ideas on the table. The democratic leadership style thrives when all the considerations are laid out for everyone to examine.
• Focus the discussion: It’s hard to keep unstructured discussion productive. It’s the leader’s job to balance being open to ideas and keeping everything on-topic. If the conversation begins to stray, remind everyone of the goal on hand and then steer it back. Make sure to take note of off-topic comments and try to return to them when they are pertinent.
• Be ready to commit: In the democratic leadership style, you get presented with so many possibilities and suggestions that it can be overwhelming and difficult to commit. But as the leader, when the time comes, you have to choose and do so with conviction. The team depends on the clear and unambiguous mandates to be committed.
• Respect the ideas: You and your team might not agree with every idea, and that’s ok. It is important, however, that you create a healthy environment where those ideas are entertained and considered –not maligned– or the flow of ideas will slow to a trickle.
• Explain, but don’t apologize: You want the advocates of the solutions that were not selected to understand that their thoughts were considered and had validity, but that ultimately you had strong reasons to go a different direction. It’s important that the decision be communicated, but you should not apologize for deciding on what you think.

Pervaiz Mascara as an Autocratic Leader

General (ret) Pervez Musharraf, born 11 August 1943 in Nehar Wali Haveli meaning “House Next to the Canal”, situated in Kacha Saad Ullah Mohallah, Daryaganj in Delhi, British India, is a Pakistani politician and military figure who served as the tenth President of Pakistan (2001-2008) and the Chief of Army Staff of the Pakistan Army (1998-2007).He took power on 12 October 1999, following a nonviolent military coup and subsequent ouster of the government of Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif. The military-led government stated its intention to restructure the political, economic and electoral systems. On May 12, 2000, Pakistan’s 12 member Supreme Court unanimously validated the October 1999 coup and granted Musharraf executive and legislative authority for 3 years from the coup date endorsing his governance.

In 1961, he entered the Pakistan Military Academy at Kakul, graduating 11th in his class. He was commissioned on April 19, 1964 in the Artillery Regiment. Later he joined the Special Services Group and was posted to Field Artillery Regiments. A graduate of the Command and Staff College, Quetta, and the National Defence College, Rawalpindi, Musharraf is also a graduate of the Royal College of Defence Studies of the United Kingdom.During his tenure has done several deceision as an Autocratic Leader.

• Economy of Pakistan come out of the list of Highly Indebted Poor Countries (HIPC) and Improvement of fiscal policies and macro-economic achievements.
• Space Program, which was last frozen in 1996 unfreezed in his tenure as well as new established a separated fund for SUPARCO to developed its high-powered HRLV, SLV, PSLV projects.
• War on Terror in 2001 invasion of Afghanistan
• “Enlightened Moderation” as an alternative to Islamic
• Poverty alleviation, the poverty level dropped from 34% to 24% and the overall living standard improves dramatically.
• Exceptional setup of 47 universities, including Virtual University
• Women’s Protection Bill on 15 November 2006
• Ethnic Minorities Rights, appointed a Christian, Derick Cyprian, as a federal minister.In August 2005, Justice Rana Bhagwandas (a Hindu) was sworn in as acting Chief Justice of Pakistan.
• Corruption in country decreases, as per Transparency International, from 11th most corrupt country to fall down to 41st. and In 2007, according to Transparency International, Pakistan is clearly ranked 138th out of 179 countries.

Relationship as a Democratic Leader :

India

Musharraf was Chief of Army Staff at the time of Mujahideen incursions into India from Pakistan-administered Kashmir in the summer of 1999. Although Pakistan claimed that these were Kashmiri freedom fighters based in Indian-controlled Kashmir, later developments showed that they were Pakistani paramilitary soldiers backing up the separatists on the mountain top.

• Kashmir dispute
• The issue of Baglihar Dam at river chenab
• Disput of Sir Creek estuary at the mouth of the Rann of Kutch, Siachin glacier, issues of Gurdaspur and Ferozepur’s status,

China

Musharraf accused Western leaders and media of politicizing the 2008 Summer Olympics by criticizing China’s human rights record and its policy in Tibet. He also said he would cooperate with China, which is a historical ally to Pakistan, in the fight against terrorism.

During President Musharraf’s government, China for the first time allowed a pakistani president access to one of its most advanced and secret military research facilities.

Saudi Arabia

Pakistan’s relationship with Saudi Arabia continues to grow. After his coup in October 1999, Riyadh was the first foreign capital General Pervez Musharraf visited, to signify the importance he gave to PAK-Saudi relations.

Both countries has common view on international issues such as Kashmir, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, Iraq, Iran’s nuclear program, Afghanistan and reform of the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC). President Musharraf honored King Abdullah by conferring upon him Pakistan’s highest civil award, Nishan-e-Pakistan, in a colorful investiture ceremony at the presidential palace.

Honor

In 2004, the President of Pakistan, General Pervez Musharraf was nominated in the final list of hopefuls for that year’s prestigious Nobel Peace Prize. It is not the very first time that a suggestion of awarding the Noble Peace Prize to President Musharraf has been made. Pakistani President in fighting terrorism against Al Qaeda and other extremist groups within Pakistan, several important figures and organisations have also begun supporting General Musharraf as the strongest entrant for the Noble Peace Prize.

Downfall of Musharraf Leadership as a President

Some of the issues cause the downfall of Musharraf’s government are listed below.

Suspension and reinstatement of the Chief Justice:

On 9 March 2007, Musharraf suspended the Chief Justice of Pakistan, Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry, pressing corruption charges against him and filed a reference against the Chief Justice, in the Supreme Judicial Council Musharraf’s moves sparked protests among Pakistani lawyers. On 12 March 2007, lawyers started Judicial Activism across Pakistan

Lal Masjid siege

The Musharraf government was forced to act against the Lal Masjid militants, after they formally announced the establishment of a parallel judicial system. The pro-Taliban Lal Masjid administration vowed to enforce Islamic laws in the federal capital and threatened to unleash a wave of suicide bombers if the government took any action to counter it.

Emergency declared in Pakistan

On 3 November 2007 Musharraf declared emergency rule across Pakistan. He suspended the Constitution, imposed State of Emergency, and fired the chief justice of the Supreme Court.

Murder of Benazir Bhutto

On 28 December,2007, suicide attack on Benazir Bhutto also creates hurdles to Musharraf and pakistani people becomes against his governement.

Resignation from the Army

On 2 Octo