Peter Parket Case
Essay Preview: Peter Parket Case
Report this essay
Much effort has been put to identify different kind of leadership styles, but most point towards that an effective leadership is one that encompasses the factors of situational variables, which calls for different leadership styles. The ability to get along with individuals whose styles conflict with ones own is the determinant of a successful leadership (Meyerson, 2001).
Within the InterContinental Communication, John Angles leadership was essentially non-existence. If anything, Johns leadership style depicts a task orientation leadership, which is closely related to one of the two dimensions of Ohio states studies (behavioral theory of leadership), a low level of initiating structure; the absence of goal settings for both his role and subordinates.
Similarly, research has identified two critical dimensions, which are assertiveness and responsiveness respectively, which influence ones leadership style. As illustrated in Alvins transcription, absence of setting direction for his subordinates and expectation of his leadership was clearly visible. He well reflects an example of a failed connector and Laissez Faire leadership style, which is giving authority and responsibility to his subordinates and avoid making decision (Mehrabian, 1971).
John Angles low level of assertiveness resulted in lack of control and communication. His strong belief in giving his subordinates all the responsibilities and authority as a motivation factor, point towards a self-managed work design for his team. According to Johns and M. Saks. (2008), self-managed team does foster stronger commitment from the subordinates, builds up productivity and job satisfaction. However, the leadership roles deployed has to in line with the work design in order to be effective. For example, John Angles absence of vision and expectation lead to unclear direction on his subordinates roles and tasks. Thus, creating an unmotivated workplace. Also, his very belief that situations such as employees conflict and communication within workplace would be a learning lesson for them, in such he left them to resolve their own conflicts that resulted in disharmony and bad communication among the various departments in the organization. All of these in turn contradict his belief and support towards an autonomous work team.
In addition, his high level of responsiveness was portrayed in his level of trust to his subordinates, which is the openness characteristic that depicts one of the Big Five. This belief of self-regulating leadership grants autonomy to the workplace, which eventually deteriorate into loose conformation and compliance of work standards, resulting in the collapse of leadership effort.
Kotter (1995) pointed out elements to create an effective leadership, it encompassed the right composition of individuals, level of communications, level of trust and a shared vision, which is critical to the direction in which an organizations needs to move and a central component to all great leadership. However in this case, his personality is but a small factor of his ineffective leadership. The main reasons were the poor communication, delegation of power, as well as the leadership styles deployed within the workplace.
Much effort has been put to identify different kind of leadership styles, but most point towards that an effective leadership is one that encompasses the factors of situational variables, which calls for different leadership styles. The ability to get along with individuals whose styles conflict with ones own is the determinant of a successful leadership (Meyerson, 2001).
Within the InterContinental Communication, John Angles leadership was essentially non-existence. If anything, Johns leadership style depicts a task orientation leadership, which is closely related to one of the two dimensions of Ohio states studies (behavioral theory of leadership), a low level of initiating structure; the absence of goal settings for both his role and subordinates.
Similarly, research has identified two critical dimensions, which are assertiveness and responsiveness respectively, which influence ones leadership style. As illustrated in Alvins transcription, absence of setting direction for his subordinates and expectation of his leadership was clearly visible. He well reflects an example of a failed connector and Laissez Faire leadership style, which is giving authority and responsibility to his subordinates and avoid making decision (Mehrabian, 1971).
John Angles low level of assertiveness resulted in lack of control and communication. His strong belief in giving his subordinates all the responsibilities and authority as a motivation factor, point towards a self-managed work design for his team. According to Johns and M. Saks. (2008), self-managed team does foster stronger commitment from the subordinates, builds up productivity and job satisfaction. However, the leadership roles deployed has to in line with the work design in order to be effective. For example, John Angles absence of vision and expectation lead to unclear direction on his subordinates roles and tasks. Thus, creating an unmotivated workplace. Also, his very belief that situations such as employees conflict and communication within workplace would be a learning lesson for them, in such he left them to resolve their own conflicts that resulted in disharmony and bad communication among the various departments in the organization. All of these in turn contradict his belief and support towards an autonomous work team.
In addition, his high level of responsiveness was portrayed in his level of trust to his subordinates, which is the openness characteristic that depicts one of the Big Five. This belief of self-regulating leadership grants autonomy to the workplace, which eventually deteriorate into loose conformation and compliance of work standards, resulting in the collapse of leadership effort.
Kotter (1995) pointed out elements to create an effective leadership, it encompassed the right composition of individuals, level of communications, level of trust and a shared vision, which is critical to the direction in which an organizations needs to move and a central component to all great leadership. However in this case, his personality is but a small factor of his ineffective leadership. The main reasons were the poor communication, delegation of power, as well as the leadership styles deployed within the workplace.
Much effort has been put to identify different kind of leadership styles, but most point towards that an effective leadership is one that encompasses the factors of situational variables, which calls for different leadership styles. The ability to get