Leadership styles and their impact on employee’s sensitivity

Leadership styles and their impact on employee’s sensitivity

Introduction

Leadership plays a crucial role in the development of an institution. For a company to effectively climb up the ladder of success, it must observe its leadership styles. The world has become very competitive in every sector; for the progress and effective sustainability of an organization, companies must observe leadership styles. The performance and productivity of employees is greatly affected by the kind of leadership styles used in managing the activities and in decision making.  According to Clark (2015), Lewin and Kurt were the first to lead a group of researchers in 1939 to study leadership styles. The results of the study by Kurt and Lewin have positively impacted leadership in many organizations. The study identified various leadership styles, which may include autocratic, charismatic, democratic, bureaucratic, transitional, and more other leadership styles. It is, therefore, essential to discuss these leadership styles and how they impact the sensitivity of the employees in an organization.

Types of leadership styles

Autocratic leadership style

Autocratic leadership is also termed as authoritarian leadership. An autocratic leader dictates procedures and policies, makes decisions on the goals to be achieved by the organization, controls, and directs all proceedings with minimum consultation from the subordinates. Authoritative leadership style is used by leaders to instruct employees on what they should do and how to do it. According to Bely (2016), this method of leadership often creates a negative leadership image for most employees. Authoritative leadership is majorly based on a few distinctive features. The features are: there is no contribution from the junior staff; the leader is the sole decision-maker, the leader controls the rules, process, and methods that the team uses to attain its goals. There are situations where autocratic leadership is effectively employed in an organization. For instance, where immediate and fast decision making is required, a leader may not have to consult the subordinates on what actions to take. The other case is where failure to make a decision might lead the employees into danger or cause more problems. A leader can also be autocratic when the employees are inexperienced or if they have a reduced motivation level, giving directions on what should be done can help to speed the process and guide the staff through the process (Belyh, 2016). The effects of autocratic leadership in an organization are far way diverse. Authoritarian leadership discourages workers from doing their best because they feel not involved in structuring the operating procedures in the organization. Poor performance by the workers leads to low productivity of the organization, which in turn leads to the organization not attaining its objectives. Another effect of autocratic leadership is poor decision making. An authoritarian leader may make uninformed decisions because of the sole decision making, which may lead to inferior performance methods and output (Bhatti &Maitlo et al., 2012).

Charismatic leadership style

Charismatic leadership is a leadership style where a leader encourages moral behaviors by effectively communicating with the subordinates, persuading them, and forcing their personalities. These leaders possess high communication skills with active listening, paraphrasing, and motivation. Charismatic leadership roots from a person’s behavioral characteristics and leaders with these characteristics inspire the subordinates by appropriately articulating the vision of the organization. Charismatic leaders do not execute their authority out of financial gain or fear but out of their moral characters and emotional excitement. A charismatic leader shows distinctive qualities, which include dominance, self-confidence, a strong urge to influence the subordinates and to focus mostly on one’s moral values (Luenendonk, 2016). Charismatic leadership gives the employees a chance to reason differently, to learn from the leader, develop an emotional appeal, and creates a collective identity among the workers.  Despite the many advantages of charismatic leadership, there are still several disadvantages to the leadership style. For instance, it entirely depends on the efforts of the leader, it interferes with the values of the subordinates, and a leader can use the method for selfish and personal ambitions (Keith, 2020). Charismatic leadership style has a positive effect on the organization. Excellent convincing skills of charismatic leaders motivate the workers to work to their level best. High motivation leads to high productivity in the organization. Since a charismatic leader freely communicates to the workers, the organization ends up making informed decisions that will prevent the organization from making losses. Charismatic leaders also assist the organization in an ethical and moral organizational culture, which will reduce misconduct within the organization.

Democratic leadership style

Democratic leadership, also called participative leadership, involves individuals who are not in the same ranking in an organization having equal powers and changes in decision making. According to STU Online (2018), participative leadership is based on mutual understanding and respect. The leadership style employs collaboration between leaders and subordinates. Gastil, in his article on democratic leadership, defines participative leadership as the distribution of responsibilities among members, empowering the members of the group, and assisting decision-making. This leadership style is rooted in a few crucial principles, which include the promotion of free exchange of ideas, enhancement of respect and trust, encouragement of competence, and motivation of an open and honest mind among employees. The main advantage of democratic leadership is that it encourages collaboration and teamwork as a culture of the organization, and this impact on employees’ engagement in decision making. Democratic leadership is faced with a few disadvantages, which include a slow decision-making process and that the style is not favorable during crises and emergencies. The participative leadership style has the best effects on an organization. Organizations that use a participative leadership style enjoy unity a good relationship between the management and the workers. Involving all the employees in decision making makes them feel like part of the organization, which makes them offer their best to increase output. In an organization that uses this method of leadership, there are very few or even no cases of workers’ dissatisfaction and demonstrations, and this helps the organization to run its operations smoothly.

Bureaucratic leadership style

In 1947, Max Weber postulated bureaucratic leadership as one of the leadership styles in organizations. Bureaucratic leadership is a management system where employees follow lines and rules of duties developed by the leader. The set of responsibilities of the workers are based on official regulations created by the organization’s higher authorities. Bureaucratic leadership is different from other forms of leadership in that a leader creates isolation for the labor requirements, which are to be completed by the teams (Clark 2015). In this form of leadership, there are different lines of command where every leader has different powers in their authority. The other feature of bureaucratic leadership is that the laws are not flexible, and therefore the rules applied are rigid. The advantage of bureaucratic leadership is that the outcome of every activity can be predicted. The other benefit is that there is job security for employees due to specialization. Lastly, the method executes favoritism since everyone operates on the set procedures, This method of leadership is cradled with several disadvantages which include low possibility to increase productivity due to the strict procedures and fixed expected results. The other drawback is that the method is not adaptive to change because of its rigid and structured rules. Bureaucratic leadership style has various effects in an organization, which include fast execution of activities due to the fixed procedures and specified tasks of every employee. Fast implementation of activities helps an organization to save on time and reduce the wastage of resources. The other effect of the leadership style is the reduction of conflicts of interest since every worker has specified responsibilities and, therefore, no confusion in the execution of duties (Ojokuku, Odetayo,  & Sajuyigbe, 2012).

Transactional leadership style

According to STU (2018), transactional leadership is leadership that on the result. The leadership style confirms the organizational structure and measures success according to the penalties and rewards of the organization. The responsibilities of transactional leaders are to maintain routine measures by facilitating the performance of the group and managing individual achievements. The main features of transactional leadership is that transactional leadership concentrates on short-term realizations, the style favors structured procedures and policies, focuses on adherence to rules and correct doing of things and it is not adaptive to change. The main advantages of transactional leadership include rewarding those who perform well and follow instructions. The other benefit is there is quick achievement of short-term goals, and finally, the penalties and rewards are defined by workers. Despite the many benefits of this leadership style, there are still disadvantages which include low creativity because the organization sets all the goals and objectives. The other drawback is that the system does not reward personal projects and initiatives since workers are required to follow what the organization has put in place strictly. The effect brought by transactional leadership is that workers do work to their best because they expect assessment from the leaders, and the best work is awarded. Therefore, the method of leadership helps an organization to get the best service from the workers because the workers will work hard so that they can be recognized and appreciated (Paracha & Qamar, 2012).

Factors in a leadership style that are sensitive to the employees

Some behaviors and actions by leaders in an organization may be sensitive to the employees in an organization. The actions may negatively affect the performance of the employees. The following are examples of sensitive factors in the way a leader handles the subordinates

Racism 

Racial discrimination is not a new thing in an organization; many institutions have experienced racism before and are still experiencing the same today despite many efforts to fight the vice. Racism is a set of practices, procedures, policies, and patterns within an organization to exploit and disadvantage members who are not from a particular race.  Leaders can be racial discriminative in matters of employment where they just employ workers from a particular group of people leaving out the others despite their qualifications. The other way of racism is by leaders promoting workers from a particular race of people only even when they did not deserve it. Racism can cause bitterness to the discriminated workers, and that may make them reduce their working morale (Ojokuku, Odetayo,  & Sajuyigbe, 2012).

Ethnicity 

 Ethnicity involves mistreatment and discrimination of people from a particular ethnic group. The leader may show favoritism to a specific ethnic group in job allocation, rewarding, recognition, promotion, and employment. Ethnicity is a sensitive factor that will undermine the performance of the affected group (Briner & Kenny, 2010).

Gender discrimination

Gender inequality in many organizations has become a complex phenomenon that is evident in organizational structures, practices, and processes. The workplaces have severally been seen as unfavorable to some people because of increased cases of gender discrimination. According to an article by Sanhee (2014), gender discrimination is viewed as negatively impacting life. If a leader is a gender-biased in terms of the delegation of duties, awarding the workers, and in promotion, the discriminated workers may feel de-motivated, and this will affect their performance and hence low output (Bobbitt-Zeher, 2011).

Conclusion

In conclusion, leadership styles affect the motivation of the workers and hence determining the productivity of the organization. A lousy leadership style, like autocratic leadership, lowers the morale of leaders because workers feel like they are not part of the organization. There are sensitive behaviors a leader can do that will negatively affect the performance of an employee. Actions like racism, gender discrimination, and ethnicity are among the activities that adversely affect the morale of workers, and it is, therefore, the responsibility of every leader to ensure that such vices do not exist in the organization.  It is therefore advisable for any organization to employ the use of the right leadership style like the democratic method of leadership, which is considered the best because it gives a chance for the voice of the subordinates to be equally considered as that of the management staff.

References

Bhatti, N., Maitlo, G. M., Shaikh, N., Hashmi, M. A., & Shaikh, F. M. (2012). The impact of autocratic and democratic leadership style on job satisfaction. International Business Research, 5(2), 192.

Paracha, M. U., Qamar, A., Mirza, A., Hassan, I. U., & Waqas, H. (2012). Impact of leadership style (transformational & transactional leadership) on employee performance & mediating role of job satisfaction. Study of private school (educator) in Pakistan. Global Journal of Management and Business Research, 12(4), 55-64.

https://www.cleverism.com/charismatic-leadership-guide/

Ojokuku, R. M., Odetayo, T. A., & Sajuyigbe, A. S. (2012). Impact of leadership style on organizational performance: a case study of Nigerian banks. American journal of business and management, 1(4), 202- Gooden, M. A. (2012). What does racism have to do with leadership? Countering the idea of color-blind leadership: A reflection on race and the growing pressures of the urban principalship. Educational Foundations, 26, 67-84. 207.

Bobbitt-Zeher, D. (2011). Gender discrimination at work: Connecting gender stereotypes, institutional policies, and gender composition of workplace. Gender & Society, 25(6), 764-786.

Briner, R. B., & Kenny, E. J. (2010). Exploring ethnicity in organizations. Equality, Diversity and Inclusion: An International Journal, 29(4), 348-363.