Essentials of Leadership
In any organization, whether private or corporate, governmental or nongovernmental, leadership is one of the key most things. Organizational progress is well connected squarely to the leadership. An organization would either progress or fall depending on the tact, the style and the traits reflected by the leadership. Whatever the effects, whether negative or positive, progressive or otherwise will in one way or another be credited to the leader. Leaders my employ diverse leadership styles towards the attainment of the vision of the organization. Owing to the diversity of different situations and circumstances, a leader may apply a specific leadership styles differing from one situation to another, while on other situations more than two styles may apply for the desired results. A key attribute in any leadership is the power to communicate. Proper communication no doubt would lead to the desired results with easy and within a desired time frame. The art of oratory is the central nerve in any leadership. As many authors in this subject have tagged communication as an element of leadership, it would be seen as the leading light in any form of leadership without which the desired results would not be realizable. The ability to communicate makes the organization move in unified direction towards the desired goal and purpose. Any one down the ladder is fed with the mind from the top and on the other hand, the subordinate views and expression are relayed up to the relevant office (De Vries et al, 2010).
Communication styles are more strongly related to charismatic and human-oriented leadership than to task-oriented leadership. Charismatic and Human-oriented leadership are more focused to the wellbeing of the employee. As the employees serve the organization for the common good, they also take the motivating spirit of the leader as a morale booster. However by the focus and the charismatic push the leader, must steer clear on the bigger picture. By engaging the employees in line with the organization’s vision, the leader would also be keen not to wander away from the organizational policies and mandate. The leadership must be able to loudly and clearly point at the vision as the key mandate of the organization. The style of putting this fundamental aspect from the top to the bottom would test the ability of the leadership communication skills. The perspective of the, say the chief executive officer and the lowest subordinate must be at the same awareness position in regard to the vision of the organization. This state of awareness would result to a unified movement towards the mark of the organizational interest and therefore enjoying the benefits of the essentials of communication (De Vries et al, 2010). From time to time the leader must set forums such as special general meetings, staff breakfast, cocktails and the like to interact with the subordinates and preview the organization’s vision and check the conversance of his team to the common focus. The task-oriented leader on the other hand would be by and large concerned with the accomplishment of the task and caring less of the welfare of the subordinate.
Both the communication styles and the charismatic and human-oriented leadership styles explain a signiﬁcant amount of variance in perceived leader performance, satisfaction with the leader, subordinates’ commitment, and both donating and collecting knowledge sharing of a subordinate with his/her leader. Proper communication will only thrive in a proper leadership structure more often than not. In any organization, the foremost thing is the establishment and operationalization of proper hierarchies. Both small and great must know who reports to whom and who answers to whom. The mode of the communication must therefore be installed, ranging from boardroom knowledge sharing to notice board postings. A proper system and chains of command would enable the top to touch the bottom and the bottom to touch the top as far as information sharing is concerned. On top of the routine and basic information, there are also day- to-days business transactions which need proper awareness at the relevant quarters (De Vries et al, 2010). This must be communicated not only well but also in time to allow proper action by the relevant officer or subordinate. The effects of such kind of leadership under hypothesis 2 are deemed to create a suitable work environment, thus high productivity of the employees.
Charismatic and human-oriented leader-ship mediates the relations between the communication styles of a leader and the outcomes of this study. Organizational dilemmas thrive where the power of sharing knowledge fails across the ranks. Stickiness of knowledge would however promote a common identity crisis across the board. The same would deter proper and cordial understanding between the management and the junior staff. Where proper information is relayed and at the right time, common understanding, cooperation and celebration of success is anticipatable. Passing of information may range in a broad spectrum pertaining to professionalism, legal perspective of the organizational operations, rules and regulation, object based awareness, hierarchy and the like.
The first hypothesis seems to be more convincing and likely to bear substantial argument in that communication styles are used in charismatic leadership. The employee does not see himself as an element of statistics, but a worthwhile contributor to the wellbeing of the organization. Though hypothesis 2 and 3 still make sense, the former is considerably more significant. Above all, passion and energy of the leadership makes the all difference in that, down the ranks, everyone will be able to capture the tone and the phase through which the communication is being transmitted and run with it. Lapses in the system must be easily identifiable by the leadership and sealed the fastest possible
De Vries, R. E., Bakker-Pieper, A., & Oostenveld, W. (2010). Leadership= communication? The relations of leaders’ communication styles with leadership styles, knowledge sharing and leadership outcomes. Journal of business and psychology, 25(3), 367-380.