Leadership Styles And Management Processes example essay topic

112 Silver Prayaas Leadership is one of the most observed and least understood phenomenon on earth. Burns (1978) remarks. The problem arises not only in understanding the operation of the theory but even in its definition Leadership is a complex and multifaceted phenomenon to which organizational and psychological research has been applied. A macro-level comparison of business organizations in India vis-a vis those of successful countries like Japan, America, Germany, France and Korea provide certain interesting information.

Physical and human resource-wise comparison indicates that there may not be yawning gaps between Indian organizations and the organization of the countries cited above. While these countries have developed management styles in consonance with their cultural ethos, Leadership in organizations: An Indian perspective S W DESHPANDE A number of theories and models have been proposed of leadership in organisations by western theorists. These theories have worked well in those countries since they have been developed keeping in view, the cultural context. These models may be good there but they prove to be some what inadequate in the Indian cultural context. Indian organisations cannot forget that their leadership models come from their socio culture. Indian cultural is so accommodative that it welcomes noble thought coming from all over the world.

The author has developed a leadership model which would befit Indian organisations. The model 'EAST MEETS WEST' could satisfy the needs of the Indian corporate world. Indian management experts had no choice but to depend on western perspectives because of the absence of a local database and theoretical framework. Leadership theory began as a one dimensional, internal and individualistic process in which only a leader's personality traits or behaviors were considered. Situational elements, external to the leader-member dyad were subsequently added to the leadership equations as well as an acknowledgement of group processes. An important new growth stage was reached in the contingency era as leadership theory evolved from uni dimensional to the multidimensional arena.

Here the interaction of the leader, subordinates and the situation all became important in explaining leadership. Leadership theory was further advanced when the focus changed from leadership being primarily a top-down process to much more of a bottom-up process. Situational and non- leadership factors were considered again but this time from an integrative perspective. The culture era built on the situational factors, which extended the scope of leadership from group interactions to the interactions of the entire organization, affected by the persons involved, their situations and their influences on each other. King (1990) has summarized the major leadership eras and periods, which are presented in Table 1. PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version web March 2003 113 Table 1: Evolutionary Stages of Leadership Theory Personality Era Transactional Era - Great Man Period - Exchange period - Trait Period - Role Development Period Influence Era Anti-Leadership Era - Power Relation Period - Ambiguity Period - Persuasion Period - Substitute Period Behavior Era Culture Era -Early Behavior Period - Transformation Era -Late Behavior Period - Charisma Period -Operant Period - Self- fulfilling Contingency Era In India the studies on leadership began in the mid 50's.

There are two definite trends in the studies, the first one are the studies done by Indian researchers following the western models, ignoring the Indian cultural characteristics and the second are the studies conducted by the American organizational behavioral scientists visiting management institutes in India in the 60's and opined on the basis of a limited data. Both the types of studies have their limitations in the sense that they have presented a lopsided view of leadership of the Indian organizations. In the first type, we may include the study by Ganguly (1977) who has surveyed a large number of managers from a variety of organizations and concluded that that there was an interactive effect of the leadership styles and the organizational climate. Leaders tended to use the benevolent autocratic style but shifted to the consultative style in organizations, which have a participative work climate. Prior to this, Pendse (1965) had done his doctoral work on consultative style of leadership and suggested that this worked very effectively with the rural folk. The second type of studies projected authoritarian features on Indians.

Mead has opined that Indian subordinates need authoritarian leaders. Empirical studies (Hofstede, 1976, 1988) comparing values across a number of countries have clearly indicated the existing cultural differences. Hofstede observed that Americans score high on recognition and achievement and low on conformity, whereas Asians scored high on conformity and orderliness but low on independence Sinha (1973) has questioned the validity of the assumption that Indians are authoritarian in the sense defined by Adorno et al (1950). One of the typical Indian cultural characteristics is tolerance, which does not go with the authoritarian personality.

Leadership styles and the management processes in India unfortunately appear to be a queer cocktail without any unique and distinctive focus of its own. Right from the start, from the post independence phase of development, not adequate and serious grass-root efforts were made to evolve leadership styles and management processes that are true to Indian ethos and culture and this ethos itself has not sufficiently been understood in its real spirit. The educated Indians appear to be Indian ising management, considering the Indian culture to be feudalistic and backward. There are many cultural values shared by both Japan and India for example, respect for the head of the family, hierarchical relationship, seniority and age.

However, in India it is these very features, which are made the principal target of attack by the Indian elite. In the '80's two indigenous theories of leadership came into prominence. The first one is by J.B.P. Sinha who advocated the Nurturant Task (NT) style of leadership. This theory follows a contingency approach in the sense that the Nurturant - Task leader is postulated to be effective only for those subordinates who prefer dependency and a personalized relationship, are status conscious and perform work as a part of a relationship. Although, majority of Indian subordinates do share these cultural characteristics, there may be enough subordinates who are independent-minded, prefer autonomy and want to work without close supervision. Such subordinates work more effectively under a participative leader.

In fact, the theory postulates a broad developmental continuum from the authoritarian through NT to participative leadership styles. This model of leadership is presented in Figure 1. PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version web 114 Silver Prayaas The Indigenous Theories o The Nurturant Task (TN) Style of Leadership (J.B.P. Sinha) A Model of Effective Leadership F NT Nt / p P Autonomous Group S 2 S 1 S 2 S 3 t 2 t 1 t 2 t 3 ti (Notes: F: authoritarian; nt / p : combination of nurturant task; P: participative leaders; S: subordinates; t: time point; solid lines: positive relationship; broken line: negative relationship; arrow: direction of relations.) Figure 1. A model of effective leadership (J.B.P. Sinha, 1982) S 1 is the Telling Style, S 2 is the Selling Style, S 3 is the Participative Style and S 4 is the Delegating Style. Hersey and Blanchard proposed these four leadership styles in their Life Cycle theory of leadership (1969). t 1, t 2 and t 3 denote the periods in the life span referring to the maturity levels of the subordinates.

The next is The Pioneering-Innovative (PI) style of leadership (Khandwalla, 1983). The NT style of leadership proposed by Sinha is more appropriate for the middle level managers whose main function is to manage human relations. Khandwalla has contended that a leader has to be pioneering and innovative. The PI style is characterized by commitment to pioneering, novel and sophisticated technologies, products and services, high risk taking and strong emphasis on creativity and adaptability. Following liberalization of economics of the developing countries in Asia, the PI style is likely to receive greater attention.

Despite Khandwalla's claim, the Pi leadership does not seem to include the typical Indian ethos of affection, nurturance, care, consideration, preference for dependency and personalized relationship, hierarchical orientation. The cultural ethos is reflected in the Singh and Bhandarkar's (1990) formulation of transformational leadership. They have tried to find the roots of Indian leadership in the Indian family. A close examination of the functioning of business organizations in India indicates that not only do we import leadership styles and management systems, but even compare this error by changing them in faddist fashion. Such an approach invariably leads to cynical reactions like branding leadership styles of management systems as new gimmicks emerging from academic ivory towers. Moreover many companies feel nonplussed by the surefire management success formulae from Harvard, Oxford or Tokyo.

Rather than blindly adopting the leadership styles and the management systems, we would be better off if we were to make the change at the root itself - evolve culturally consistent and relevant leadership styles. Indian culture, being probably the only unbroken culture in the world, has both kinds of processes: Those that can help change and those that hinder change (development). A better understanding of these processes may help us to use them for planning. Positive forces in the Indian culture include high extension motivation (concern for others), as reflected in the patriotic traditions, and respect for others as reflected in the welcoming different ideas, people openness; synthesis, respect for knowledge etc. The following processes in Indian culture are shown in Table 2: Table 2: Processes in the Indian Culture 1. Dependency motive, generating - a) Avoidance syndrome (not taking initiative, not taking responsibility, exaggerating obstacles) b) Excessive fear of failure and risk avoidance c) Over conformism d) Favor seeking 2.

Caste ism, generating - a) Difficulty to relate to peer level b) Dependency relationship as contrasted with interdependence c) Role fixation d) Self rejection resulting because of role fixation 3. Fatalism, generating - a) Cynicism (Nothing good The Indigenous Theories PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version web March 2003 115 can come out) b) Lack of self critical self examination (Low personal block) 4. Non-involvement and non commitment - (feeling of joy after success and feeling of sadness after failure) a) Non-conforming behavior b) Excessive tolerance 5. Individualism, generating - a) Lack of interpersonal trust b) Difficulties in collaboration 6. Ir reality orientation, generating - (may be due to Upanishad ic teaching that everything is MAYA - unveil) a) Symbol infatuation b) Fantasy directed ness c) Difficulty in anticipating problems and values Singh and Bhandarkar (1990) have listed some components of Indian culture. They are presented in Table 3.

Table 3: Components of Indian Culture Karta Relationships Respect for elders Proximity to Power Hierarchy Security Simple Living and High Thinking Psychology of Entitlement and over - emphasis on Reward The first component is the institution of KARTA. The immense authority and power characterize the Karta or the head of the house. Besides, since the Hindu family is largely a patriarchal institution, the father is the most omnipotent in the family. The 'Karta' experience is amongst the earliest and strongest socialization experiences of the Indian child. It is nurturing, caring, dependable, sacrificing, yet demanding authoritative and strict dimension of the father (or figure head of the house) which the individual learns to value for in life. By behavior and style, the Karta normally evokes a feeling of security, trust and dependability.

As a result of this cumulative experience, a father is what the individual looks for symbolically in the workplace, for empowering and protection. In return the individual develops respect and reverence for his superior and demonstrates willingness to respect his authority. When the individual joins work with his set of expectations, he can be faced with two kinds of situations. He either has a superior who, by and large, meets his demands or he finds that the superior is very low on 'Karta - like' traits, there is meaningful and purposeful superior - subordinate relationship. The superior also finds that he can easily build a cohesive team, with the subordinates having respect for his authority. On the other hand, when the superior fails to satisfy the "Karta image" expectations, these very positive behaviors may easily turn negative.

In the extreme case, there will be non-acceptance for the superior's formal authority. Relationship is the next important component of the Indian culture. This is the result of the extended childhood, which characterizes the Indian family system, compared to the shorter childhood, which children experience in the western system of child rearing. The individual comes to the work place and brings with him a strong need to relate with others. When organizational culture is not Dr. S.W. Deshpande has done his post graduation in arts and is a consultant, Trainer and Teacher. He was the Head of Dept. of Psychology in the University of Pune from 1995 July to 1997.

He was also the Programme Director of Sinh gad Institute of Business Administration Pune. He has presented various papers on management in National and International journals and has attended International Conferences in management in Dublin, Sharjah and Dubai. He was the King Edward Memorial Scholar from 1959 to 1961. He was also the President of the Marathi Manas shastra Paris had and the Chairman of the Board of Studies in Psychology and Member of the Academic Council of S NDT University, Mumbai. PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version web 116 Silver Prayaas depersonalized, relatedness releases positive energies like empathy, intimacy, togetherness, we-feeling etc. When the organization culture is characterized by impersonality, formal role-relationship, individual experiences a sense of deprivation of intimacy.

Work wise, there is poor team spirit leading to poor performance, especially where people with different group orientations have to work together as a team. Proximity to power: The ethos of the joint family system with its heavy accent on Karta experiences, generates a unique psychological response in the individual. The experienced powerlessness (to act independently) and dependency in childhood and adolescence result in placing a high value on the power as well as need to choose this power source. In the workplace the person has similar expectation from the superior who is looked up as a powerful person.

There can be too many expectations, and excessive dependence upon the authority figure. At the work level, this would mean that there is no independent decision making, thus killing individual capacity to take risk and initiative to be innovative and creative. Blake and Mouton (1952), borrowing two dimensions form classical American studies, developed a Managerial grid. The two dimensions were concern for task and concern for people.

They highlighted five leadership styles in the managerial grid, which is presented in Fig. 2. Fig 2: Managerial Grid THE GRID (Blake & Mouton) 9, 1 1, 1 9, 5 9, 5 5, 9 5, 9 High 9 Low Concern for production High 1, 9 Thoughtful attention to needs for satisfying relationships leads to a comfortable, friendly organisation atmosphere & work tempo. 9, 9 Work accomplishment is from committed people. Interdependence through a "common stake" in organisation purpose leads to relationships of trust & respect. Exertion of minimum effort to get work done is appropriate to sustain organisation membership. Efficiency in operations results from arranging conditions of work in such a way that human elements interfere to a minimum degree.

1 Low 2 8 Concern for people 6 5 4 3 5, 5 Adequate organisation performance is possible through balancing the necessity to get out work with maintaining morale of people at a satisfactory level. 7 The present investigator is attracted to the managerial grid. In order to evolve culturally consistent (not accept) them. If these noble thoughts were culturally relevant, we would surely assimilate them. If we see the components of Indian culture, an individual at the workplace expects a boss who is powerful but at the same time sympathetic, caring and also providing security to the employee. He should be like As strong and hard as the sword but as delicate and soft as a flower.

A East Meets West (DESHPANDE, 1997) 9.1 9.1 1.1 1.1 9.5 9.5 5.5 5.5 9.9 9.9 5.9 5.9 1.9 1.9 Concern for productivity Concern for people CONSULTATIVE TYPE BENEVOLENT AUTOCRAT Benevolent Autocrat Indicators: o Decisive / shows initiative o Finisher / committed o Evaluative of quality, quantity, time o Costs, profits & sales-conscious both develops & proposes new ideas o Shows that efficiency & productivity are valued o Industrious / energetic o Obtains results and relevant leadership styles, one has to carefully consider the components of Indian culture. It is also necessary to see that there are culturally relevant models of leadership prevailing in the western countries, which proved the test of time. Our teaching of Upanishad as have widened our horizon to welcome whatever good is there in any part of the world Let all the noble thoughts come from all over the world, we would welcome PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version web March 2003 117 who become mature, responsible and also committed to the organization. For such employees 5.9 style - CONSUlTATIVE TYPE would be more relevant (Figure. 3). There is a difference between this style and American participative style.

In the latter, the decisions are arrived at through discussions wherein each member participates. Every member has a role to play in the decisionmaking. In the consultative style, the boss, leader, or the powerful person discusses with the other individuals in the group, consults them but he is the decision maker. This style is recommended for the higher level subordinates. As the Indian teaching goes:

Bibliography

1) King, A.S. (1990) Evolution of Leadership Theory Vikalja: Vol 15 (2), 43-54 2) Singh, P and Bhandarkar, A (1989) Transformational leaders- A Study of their leadership profile Public Enterprises Vol 9, Nos.
3-4 3) Pendse V.V. (1965) Consultative Type of Leadership, Unpublished P.
Hd. Thesis Submitted to University of Pune 4) Singh, P and Bhandarkar (1989) From Cultural Ethos to organizational milieu, In Management in Govt published by IS TD, New Delhi.
5) Sinha JBP (1982) Indian Perspectives on Leadership and Power in organizations.
In social behavior and personality edited by Jan ale Pande Allahabad. 6) Burns, J M (1978) Leadership, New York: Harper and Row 7) Blake, R.
R. Morton J.S. (1966) The Managerial Grid " Management Facades" Advance Management Journal 8) Cheers, M.
N. (2000) Leadership research and theory: A functional integration group dynamics, Theory Research and practice Vol 4, No 1, 27-43 9) Humphreys, J.
H. (2001) Transformational and Transactional Leader Behavior Journal of management Research Vol 1 No 3 148-156 10) Dhar, V Mishra, P (2001) Leadership effectiveness Journal of Management Research Vol 1 No 4 255-266 11) Adorno, T.
W. Frenkel-Brunswick, Else, Levinson, D.J. & Sanford, R.N. (1950) The Authoritarian personality, New York, Harper Leadership is action, not position - D.