- Published: October 3, 2022
- Updated: October 3, 2022
- University / College: Nottingham Trent University
- Level: Secondary School
- Language: English
- Downloads: 29
Question Describe situational leadership I and II. What are the differences? Similarities? How can they be applied to your organization? Common about situational leadership is the notion that it completely debunks the unacceptability of leadership ideas based on traits and styles (Kreitner & Kinicki, 2010, p. 472). Situational theories of leadership involved Fiedler’s contingency model and House’s revised path goal theory, which are actually theories trying to define leadership beyond traits and styles. Fiedler’s contingency style is based on the notion that styles must be adapted to the situation. At this point, there is a remarkable issue concerning situational control. However, House’s revise path goal theory was based on expectancy theory which assumed that motivation to exert effort increases with environmental factors. However, this theory was reformulated, leading to the inclusion of leader behaviors, employee characteristics and leadership effectiveness.
These two situational leadership theories can be actually applied in an organization as they both combined styles and actual situations together. For this reason, there is an inclusion of what could probably motivate an employee which can be generally understood from the actual prevailing situations. Combining these theories or leadership styles can somehow be effectively used in expanding the level of influence a leader must possess in an organization or team. For this reason, these leadership styles are actually helpful in maintaining the idea about human resource motivation. In case of motivating the team, so as to increase the level of influence of a leader, either one of these leadership styles could be applied within an organization. By employing higher understanding of the situation in an organization and knowing the human resource’s actual needs that could motivate them, these two situational leadership could be entirely applied.
Question 2
“ Women cannot lead because they do no come from a basis of power. And, when they are put in a leadership position, they overcompensate by requiring impossible actions from their subordinates and being very autocratic.” Analyze this quote and provide your thoughts.
I think there is something wrong with this quote as it tries to emphasize leadership to be primarily fueled by power. In this case, a woman is assumed less powerful than a man, making her less effective in leadership activity. There is a wrong conception of leadership in this case because in the first place, it is not about power, but influence (Kreitner & Kinicki, 2010). The other point is that there is another presumption about the capacity of women to lead in a team, which is very autocratic and trying to come up with impossible actions. At this point, there is a strong connection about linking the idea of women’s leadership style and traits. Some theories try to expound the point that leadership can be reasonably described based on the leaders’ actual style and traits. However, there are some significant drawbacks about this as opposed by other leadership theories (Kreitner & Kinicki, 2010, p. 472; Collins, 2005).
The effectiveness of leadership therefore does not actually include the idea about gender. After all, it is reasonable that it could not be fully focused on traits and style, but what is clear is that it is all about influence. Everyone could have influence to lead a team and even motivate the human resource to achieve goals even beyond their personal interests. For this reason, the above quote is too narrow to define the appropriate concept about leadership. It does not cover the entire issue associated with leadership, and the actual concepts about the power of influence associated with leading a team.
References
Kreitner, R. & Kinicki, A. (2010). Organizational Behavior (10th ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill/Irwin.
Collins, J. (2005). Level 5 Leadership: The triumph of humility and fierce resolve. Harvard Business Review.