Theories of leadership
Management Theory by Max Weber
Max Weber believed that the most effective way to design and manage an organization with many employees to improve productivity is to ensure fairness. Every worker is treated equally without any form of bias and is assigned tasks justly. The organization’s responsibilities are divided into sections among the organization members in a similar way (Aguinis et al., 2017). Weber also identified that there should be a well-defined hierarchy of management system in an organization of such a kind that will support the smooth running of the organization (Guest, 2017). These will enhance communication and division of labor depending on the layers of management that are already existing. The organization’s advancement is majorly determined by the individual qualifications rather than the personal connections in the management hierarchy (AlManei et al., 2018). Weber also believed that the environment at the workplace should be professional and impersonal. Working relationships, according to Weber, are heavily discouraged (Arifin et al., 2017). He also advocates for labor division, which encourages high specialization to ensure maximizing skills and expertise.
Contingency Theory
The theory is founded on the principle that employees have different needs. As such, no single leadership applies to every situation encountered in daily activities (Dumont et al., 2017). Various scenarios are influenced by diverse variables, which are highly dynamic. Accordingly, the managers are responsible for accurately selecting the right action for the multiple scenarios to apply set theoretical propositions. It is imperative to note that effective leadership is one that balances the firm’s needs, behavior, and context. Appropriate management comprises the right traits and the abilities that will enable managers to assess their subordinates’ needs, analyze the situations, and act accordingly (Bakari et al., 2017). This management theory’s application makes it possible for managers to deal with issues with ease and effectiveness (Abubakar et al., 2019). Yet, this theory does not provide any explanation regarding why some leaders are more efficient. Generally, those who see their colleagues as positive tend to just be on good terms with them or just use them to their advantage.
Motivational Leadership Theory
Managers in the organization differ, each with a different style that they feel is best for them to use in different situations. It is clear that without motivation, employees cannot adequately perform their duties and fulfill their abilities (Tahir and Iraqi, 2018). According to this theory, leaders lead with meaning, values to achieve a bigger goal. In particular, it requires honesty, providing a positive example, boosting, supporting, applying practical communication skills, and facing challenges. Besides, giving credit, expecting the best from employees, setting realistic objectives, and assisting workers in focusing on the team’s interests rather than on individual needs prove to be the best options for motivational leaders. The theory of motivation of the famous psychologist Abraham Maslow helped managers to understand the motivation of employees. The approach is comprised of Maslow’s hierarchy of needs, which divides basic human needs into five categories: physiological, safety, social, self-esteem, and self-actualization (Tahir and Iraqi, 2018). When a manager aims to motivate a worker, the former automatically becomes better at performing their abilities.
Maslow differentiates physiological needs to be necessary for physical survival, for instance, food, water, and sleep. The second critical need is safety which presumes to have a comfortable home or following the safety guidelines. Social needs express one’s will to feel belonging and create trustful relationships. Self-esteem refers to the development of confidence, self-assurance, and a sense of accomplishment. When an individual meets these four needs, they start contemplating the idea of self-realization and finding their path. Showing a genuine interest in one’s employees, realizing their intentions, meeting their needs presumes to encourage them to work better. Therefore, the motivational theory is based upon Maslow’s principles that allow employees to perform better in order to realize one’s potential (Tahir and Iraqi, 2018). This theory is further subdivided into behavioral trait, and grand man sub-theories.
Trait Theory of Leadership
The theory is based on the grand man theory’s explanations in assuming that the leaders are born with leadership traits, making them have a higher advantage on leadership than the rest of society than those who lack the natural feature born trait (DeNisi and Murphy, 2017 pp.421). The theory pinpoints some qualities: having high intelligence accountabilities, a high degree of responsibility, and creativity, making them excel at leadership (Eveleens et al., 2017). Regardless of them not having formal knowledge, they can lead and make decisions that will show the organizations to have high-performance levels and advancement of careers of their employees. Nevertheless, situational factors such as social and economic inequality that affect one’s ability to lead will not be considered.
Behavioral Theory
In this theory, the leaders’ traits and their qualities are shifted from the usual ones to learning new skills, behaviors, and actions that are heavily needed by the employees so that they can get to improve their output in the firm. The theory is in contrast to the grand man theory, and the idea gives the approach to leaders to have considerations of the skills they have learned and acquired over time (Taska, 2017). This theory emphasizes that to become a good leader, one must learn and get guidance from a broad perspective to understand the employees and their needs (Tahir and Iraqi, 2018). They are solving the problems and meeting their necessities. The more the individual learns, the more skills they acquire as managers; therefore, they can improve their performance and career from time to time. Therefore, it is one of the main weaknesses since the majority of traits and behaviors are acquired and demand time to develop.
Grand Man Theory of Leadership
This theory of management is based on the assumption that leadership is an inborn trait. It emphasizes that leaders are born and not made. According to the viewpoint, the person who is a leader has the personalities and attributes of a figurehead, charm, intellect, confidence (Su, 2017). They display communication abilities and skills that they process as social attitudes (Dalcher, 2017). It does not require learning for the individual to become a leader but something inborn and comes out automatically. The theory is more discouraging to the people who desire to learn leadership skills and have these capabilities help them lead the rest to increase their performance level (Teece, 2018). Thus, this theory encourages people who are charismatic by nature and know how to guide others. Yet, it does not
Transformation Theory of Leadership
The relationships in the organization between the leader and the leaders themselves are essential as they can significantly influence how performance is brought about. Therefore, the transformational theory of leadership puts much emphasis on this leader and follower relationship (Walls, 2019). Even though the theory is relatively new, it has a great impact on the modern understanding of leadership. The term as first introduced in the study of political leaders, yet it found its implementation in corporations as well. The theory presumes encouraging the followers to transform and become better in the tasks they get to undertake (Walls, 2019). Transformational leadership occurs at every level of the organization: teams, departments, and the firm as a whole. Such leaders are visionary, inspiring, bold, adventurous, thoughtful thinkers, and charismatic. However, these qualities are not sufficient to ensure company’s productivity.
This kind of leader is motivated by the ability to show their followers the importance of the functions and get involved in performing these tasks (Bruskin et al., 2017). This kind of manager does not focus on the team’s performance but has individuals do the best of their ability so that the skills the individuals have been sharpened to produce the best. The proponents consider such a philosophy that a leader is capable of influencing followers’ minds only if he practices what he preaches (Bruskin et al., 2017). Leaders try to show the positive example of how employees should behave. Their actions are the sign to trust and respect them. Typically, workers’ needs are placed first and these leaders tend to sacrifice their personal desires, and display high standards of ethical behavior. In general, they may use power in order to achieve a common goal. However, one of the main weaknesses of transformational leadership is that it puts much focus on the task envisioning rather than completing it (Bruskin et al., 2017). They like the ideas setting, but sometimes do not consider their employees’ ability to fulfill them.
Transactional Theory
The transactional theory is also referred to as the exchange theory of leadership, which revolves around the supervisors’ functions, firm, and teamwork surrounding employees’ daily undertaking. The theory was introduced by Max Weber in 1947, and later was revised by Bernard Bass in 1981. This is one of the most popular approaches used for managing since it is based upon primary organizational actions including managing, team-building, controlling, and planning.
In this theory, there is the involvement of punishments and rewards as the foundation of the leadership actions that will help in dealing and handling the employees so that managers can get the best performance out of them (Velinov et al., 2018). Evidence suggests that the reward system envisaged by transactional leaders encourages the knowledge sharing, and this, consequently, contributes to organizational creativity (Hussain et al., 2017). It is most commonly used to motivate the employees so that they get rewarded when they do the best in their undertaking (You et al., 2020). When they do wrong, they must be aware of punishment that may include withdrawal of their privileges or getting fired (Lacroix and Pircher Verdorfer, 2017). These may bring about responsibilities and make the employees do their best to minimize the wrongs they do for their success.
On the other hand, transactional leaders overestimate detailed and short-term goals. By concentrating much on the objectives, they make no effort to boost employees’ creativity and create new ideas. Therefore, this approach would be efficient in a firm with clearly set goals and detailed plans. Such leaders tend to discourage or ignore ideas that do not correspond to the existing schedules and plans (Hussain et al., 2017). This strategy would be beneficial for organizations who wat to cut costs and increase productivity.
Contingency Management Theory
The contingency management theory holds that the management approach applied to the organization is not just one method but a variety (Bodrožić and Adler, 2018). The main reason being the organization’s external and internal factors will ultimately affect the selection of the approach that has to be applied. This theory identifies their variables that are likely to influence the organization’s structure. They include the firm’s size, the technology employed, and the leadership style applied to that particular firm (Raffoni et al., 2018). The contingencies that are particularly relevant in organizational settings correspond to two key characteristics of the environment—its complexity and (aleatory) uncertainty—and to two key characteristics of the decision makers: their experience and informedness (Csazsar and Ostler, 2020). The theory then suggests that the leader’s traits are directly about the effectiveness of his leadership. Leaders should be flexible so that they can accommodate the changes in the environment (Purwanto et al., 2019). There are no specific tactics for managing the firms; there is a particular style that will fit a particular situation and assess how well oriented the manager is to the skills-oriented.
The approach is based on the ideology that the most appropriate way to management is to understand that there is no standard approach in management. Numerous contingent circumstances require systematic evaluation and application of theoretical models, which align with planning and response to business dynamics. Generally, the leaders are supposed to identify the conditions present and determine the best management scheme to handle the anomaly (Granlund and Lukka, 2017). Moreover, the theory assumes that organizations and people change over time. Thus the analysis models should be continually updated as per the transitions in the business world. Some of the factors considered include the size of the organization, the firm’s adaptive behavior, and the technology used. Each of these has to be carefully analyzed to design the applicable response to business dynamics.
Strategic Human Resources Management
Strategic Human Resources Management (SHRM) relates to the relationship between human resources and firms’ goals and objectives. SHRM aims to improve and advance the company’s flexibility which further allows expanding the competitive advantage (Steinbach et al., 2017). Moreover, its primary concern relates to the development of a goal-appropriate organizational culture, which means that both managers and employees should strive for increased productivity.
For Strategic Human Resources Management achievement of the set goals, human resources (HR) must play a critical role as a strategic partner in the development and implementation of business policies. Strategic human resource management is seen in numerous activities, including hiring, educating, and encouraging followers (Steinbach et al., 2017). Strategic HR involves finding ways in which HR can have a direct impact on a company’s growth. Human resources personnel should apply a strategic approach to worker development and retention in order to provide their company with long-term staff.
Problems with HR can be a difficult obstacle to cross for many companies. There are numerous sources of confusion for entrepreneurs, which consciously or unconsciously force them to make poor decisions slowing down both employees and firms’ performance (Abubakar, et al., 2019). HR departments do not tend to work alone; instead, they interact with other employees or divisions within an organization for a better understanding of their targets. Such a technique helps them to create united strategies. As a consequence, the goals of a human resources department refer to promoting and maintaining the organization’s objectives.
Organizational success is entirely dependent on Strategic HRM, unlike a need for legal compliance or compensation. SHRM working in collaboration with different departments allows for improved performance and better outcomes in general (Steinbach et al., 2017). Once all departments are pursuing the same goals, the firms’ success is guaranteed. Strategic HR analyzes employees and determines the actions necessary to augment their value to the company. Strategic Human Resource Management develops the results on the basis of numerous analyses and eligibility criteria for Human Resource Management and techniques for resolving employee weaknesses. Strategic human resources management an indispensable part of every company. The company does not need to employ a specific number of employees before starting to consider implementing strategic HR management principles.
If the company has a plan to expand itself, Strategic Human Resource Management may address this growth and attract people who could contribute to it as well. Some companies hire HRs through outsourcing firms since this part of the business is underdeveloped in their company. Strategic HR services ensure the completeness of HR functions, including developing a human resource management strategy (Steinbach et al., 2017). Strategic Human Resources services help remove the burden of operational and strategic management to facilitate the growth of one’s business.
Reasons for Interest in the Theoretical Propositions
Various managers should be interested in learning many management theories since it helps them maximize their productivity. These theories are vital in educating the leaders on how they should be handling their human assets at the workplace to give the best of their ability. Instead of purchasing new equipment or having new market strategies, managers should invest in their employees by having them trained to produce the best quality and quantity of output. The decision-making process used a simple and thorough understanding of theories which have proved highly useful. One such is the Max Weber model that proposes a system that encourages critical analysis. It also facilitates innovation and, at the endpoint speeding up the decision-making process. The theories also aim to promote the relationship between the individual in the organization, making that collaborative aspect grow as the employer gives a lot of power to the employees in making decisions that are impacting the organization in the long run. As such, the organization implements the principles in practice to improve productivity and service quality.
Reference List
Abubakar, A. M., et al., 2019. Knowledge management, decision-making style, and organizational performance. Journal of Innovation & Knowledge, 4(2), pp.104-114.
Aguinis, H., Edwards, J.R., and Bradley, K.J., 2017. Improving our understanding of moderation and mediation in strategic management research. Organizational Research Methods, 20(4), pp.665-685. Web.
AlManei, M., Salonitis, K. and Tsinopoulos, C., 2018. A conceptual lean implementation framework based on change management theory. Procedia cirp, 72, pp.1160-1165. Web.
Bakari, H., Hunjra, A.I. and Niazi, G.S.K., 2017. How does authentic leadership influence planned organizational change? The role of employees’ perceptions: Integration of theory of planned behavior and Lewin’s three step model. Journal of Change Management, 17(2), pp.155-187. Web.
Bettinger, E., et al., 2018. Increasing perseverance in math: Evidence from a field experiment in Norway. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 146, pp.1-15. Web.
Birasnav, M., Chaudhary, R. and Scillitoe, J., 2019. Integration of social capital and organizational learning theories to improve operational performance. Global Journal of Flexible Systems Management, 20(2), pp.141-155. Web.
Bodrožić, Z. and Adler, P.S., 2018. The evolution of management models: A neo-Schumpeterian theory. Administrative Science Quarterly, 63(1), pp.85-129. Web.
Bratton, J. and Gold, J., 2017. Human resource management: theory and practice. Palgrave.
Bruskin, S.N., et al., 2017. Business performance management models based on the digital corporation’s paradigm, 20(4A), pp.264-274. Web.
Cote, R., 2017. A comparison of leadership theories in an organizational environment. International Journal of Business Administration, 8(5), pp.28-35. Web.
Csaszar, F.A. and Ostler, J., 2020. A contingency theory of representational complexity in organizations. Organization Science, 31(5), pp.1198-1219.
Dahlgaard-Park, S.M., Reyes, L. and Chen, C.K., 2018. The evolution and convergence of total quality management and management theories. Total Quality Management & Business Excellence, 29(9-10), pp.1108-1128. Web.
Dalcher, D., 2017. What has Taylor ever done for us? Scientific and humane management reconsidered. PM World Journal, 6. Web.
DeNisi, A.S. and Murphy, K.R., 2017. Performance appraisal and performance management: 100 years of progress? Journal of applied psychology, 102(3), p.421. Web.
Dumont, J., Shen, J. and Deng, X., 2017. Effects of green HRM practices on employee workplace green behaviour: The role of psychological green climate and green employee values. Human Resource Management, 56(4), pp.613-627. Web.
Eveleens, C.P., van Rijnsoever, F.J. and Niesten, E.M., 2017. How network-based incubation helps start-up performance: a systematic review against the background of management theories. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 42(3), pp.676-713. Web.
Fiaz, M., Su, Q. and Saqib, A., 2017. Leadership styles and employees’ motivation: Perspective from an emerging economy. The Journal of Developing Areas, 51(4), pp.143-156. Web.
Granlund, M. and Lukka, K., 2017. Investigating highly established research paradigms: Reviving contextuality in contingency theory based management accounting research. Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 45, pp.63-80.
Guest, D.E., 2017. Human resource management and employee well‐being: Towards a new analytic framework. Human Resource Management Journal, 27(1), pp.22-38. Web.
Hussain, S. T., Abbas, J., Lei, S., Jamal Haider, M., & Akram, T., 2017. Transactional leadership and organizational creativity: Examining the mediating role of knowledge sharing behavior. Cogent Business & Management, 4(1). Web.
Khorasani, S.T. and Almasifard, M., 2017. Evolution of management theory within 20 century: A systemic overview of paradigm shifts in management. International Review of Management and Marketing, 7(3), pp.134-137.
Kumar, P., Maiti, J. and Gunasekaran, A., 2018. Impact of quality management systems on firm performance. International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, 35(5), Web.
Lacroix, M. and Pircher Verdorfer, A., 2017. Can servant leaders fuel the leadership fire? The relationship between servant leadership and followers’ leadership avoidance. Administrative Sciences, 7(1), p.6. Web.
McAdam, R., Miller, K. and McSorley, C., 2019. Towards a contingency theory perspective of quality management in enabling strategic alignment. International Journal of Production Economics, 207, pp.195-209. Web.
Netelenbos, B., 2020. Bringing back Max Weber into Network Governance Research. Critical Policy Studies, 14(1), pp.67-85. Web.
Purwanto, A., Asbari, M. and Santoso, P.B., 2019. Does Culture, Motivation, Competence, Leadership, Commitment Influence Quality Performance? Inovbiz: Jurnal Inovasi Bisnis, 7(2), pp.201-205.
Raffoni, A., et al., 2018. Business performance analytics: exploring the potential for performance management systems. Production Planning & Control, 29(1), pp.51-67.
Abubakar, A. M., Elrehail, H., Alatailat, M. A. and Elçi, A., 2019. Knowledge management, decision-making style, and organizational performance. Journal of Innovation & Knowledge, 4(2), pp.104-114.
Scholz, M. and Hoyningen-Huene, P., 2020. Systematicity: The Nature of Scientific Management and Organizational Knowledge. In Academy of Management Proceedings 66(7-8), pp.895-932. Web.
Steinbach, A.L., et al., 2017. Top management team incentive heterogeneity, strategic investment behavior, and performance: A contingency theory of incentive alignment. Strategic Management Journal, 38(8), pp.1701-1720. Web.
Su, Y., 2017. Taylor scientific management theory carding and significance of organization management. Social Sciences, 6(4), p.102. Web.
Tahir, K.H.K. and Iraqi, K.M., 2018. Employee Performance and Retention: A Comparative Analysis of Theory X, Y and Maslow’s Theory. Journal of Management Sciences, 5(1), pp.100-110. Web.
Taska, L., 2017. Scientific management. The Oxford Handbook of Management, pp.19-38.
Teece, D.J., 2018. Dynamic capabilities as (workable) management systems theory. Journal of Management & Organization, 24(3), pp.359-368. Web.
Velinov, E., Vassilev, V. and Denisov, I., 2018. Holacracy and obliquity: contingency management approaches in organizing companies. Problems and Perspectives in Management, 16(1), pp.330-335.
Walls, E., 2019. The value of situational leadership. Community practitioner: the journal of the Community Practitioners’& Health Visitors’ Association, 92(2), pp.31-33. Web.
You, W., et al., 2020. The business model of Do-It-Yourself (DIY) laboratories–A triple-layered perspective. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 159, p.120205. Web.