Leadership †Making the Business Successful

Leadership has different meanings to various authors. Leadership could be defined as influence, that is, the art of process of influencing plurality so that they will strive willingly and enthusiastically toward the achievement of theme goals (Bass, 1981). Although their coming to leadership possible action is originally one of analyzing leadership style, Fred E. Fiedler and his associates at the University of Illinois have suggested a contingency supposition of leadership (Fiedler, 1967).The theory holds that commonwealth become leaders not solely because of the attributes of their face-to-faceities but as well as because of various inclineingal factors and the interactions between leaders and group members. On the basis of his studies, Fiedler described three critical dimensions of the leadership situation that help curb what style of leadership will be to the highest degree effective (Miner, 1982) couch precedent is the degree to which the agent of a commit, as dis tinguished from opposite sources of power, such as personality or expertise, enables a leader to reach group members to comply with directions in the case of managers, this is the power arising from ecesisal authority. As Fiedler points out, a leader with clear and considerable position power drop obtain good dramati studyrship more easily than one without such power (Bowers, 1975).With the dimension of Task structure, Fiedler had in mind the extent to which jobs can be clearly spelled out and people held responsible for them. If tasks be clear (rather than dim and unstructured), the quality of actance can be more easily controlled and group members can be held more definitely responsible for performance. Fiedler regarded the dimension of Leader-member transaction as the most important from a leaders point of view, since position power and task structure may be largely nether the control of an enterprise. It has to do with the extent to which group members like, trust, and are willing to follow a leader (Yuki, 1981).To get along his study, Fiedler set forth two major styles of leadership. One of these is primarily task-oriented that is, the leader gains satisfaction from seeing tasks performed. The other is oriented primarily toward achieving good interpersonal relations and attaining a position of personal prominence. Favorableness of situation was defined by Fiedler as the degree to which a abandoned situation enables a leader to exert influence all over a group.To measure leadership styles and determine whether a leader is mainly task-oriented, Fiedler used an unusual testing technique (Kirkpatrick & Locke, 1991). He based his findings on two sources (1) scores on the least(prenominal) preferred coworker (LPC) scale these are ratings made by people in a group as to those with whom they would least like to work and (2) scores on the assumed parity between opposites (ASO) scaleratings based on the degree to which leaders see group members as being like themselves, on the assumption that people will like scoop up, and work best with, those who are seen as most like themselves.Today the LPC scale is most commonly used in research. In developing this scale, Fiedler asked respondents to identify the traits of a person with whom they could work least well (Fiedler, 1967).Leadership performance depends as much on the organization as it depends on the leaders own attributes. Except perhaps for the unusual case, it is just now not meaningful to speak of an effective leader or an otiose leader we can only speak of a leader who tends to be effective in one situation and ineffective in another. If we compliments to increase organizational and group effectiveness we must learn not only how to train leaders more effectively but also how to build an organizational environment in which the leader can perform well (Indvik, 1986).In a highly structured situation, such as in the military during a war, where the leader has strong pos ition power and good relations with members, there is a favorable situation in which task orientation is most appropriate. The other extreme, an unfavorable situation with moderately poor relations, an unstructured task, and weak position power, also suggests task orientation by the leader, who may reduce anxiety or equivocalness that could be created by the loosely structured situation. Between the two extremes, the suggested approach emphasizes cooperation and good relations with people.To conclude, leadership is the art or process of influencing people so that they contribute willingly and enthusiastically toward group goals. Leadership requires followership. The approach to leadership, built on the assumption that leaders are the product of given situations, focuses on the study of situations.Fiedlers contingency approach takes into account the position power of the leader, the structure of the task, and the relations between the leader and group members. This would obtain the followers to like, trust and follow the leader. The conclusion is that there is no one best leadership style and that managers can be successful if placed in appropriate situations.ReferencesBass, Barnard M. 1981. Stodgills Handbook of Leadership A survey of theory and research, Rev. ed, New York The Free Press.Bowers, David G. 1975. Hierarchy, Function and the Generalizability of Leadership Practices, in James G. pursuit and Lars L. Larson (eds.), Leadership Frontiers (Kent, Ohio Kent State University Press, 1975), pp. 167-180.Fiedler, Fred E. 1967. A Theory of Leadership Effectiveness (New York McGraw-Hill maintain Company, 1967).Indvik, Julie. 1986. Path Goal Theory of Leadership A Meta-Analysis, in toilette A. Pearce II and Richard B. Robinson, Jr. (eds.), honorary society of Management Best Papers-Proceedings, Forty-Sixth yearly Meeting of the Academy of Management, Chicago (Aug. 13-16, 1986), pp. 189-192.Kirkpatrick, Shelley A. & Locke, Edwin A. 1991. Leadership Do Traits M atter? Academy of Management Executive (May 1991), pp. 48-60.Miner, John B. 1982. Theories of Organizational Structure and Process, Hinsdale, Ill. The Dryden Press, Chap.2.Yuki, Gary A. 1981. Leadership in Organization, (Englewood Cliffs, N. Prentice-Hall, chap. 4.