Leadership Styles & Organizational Performance

The purpose of this study was to examine the extent to which different leadership styles affect organizational performance. Literature is reviewed in support of this study purpose. The findings of the literature are presented in two major discussions. The first major discussion covers the review of literature related to leadership theory and concepts, while the second major discussion covers the review of literature related to leadership research.

A generally accepted agreement on the definition leadership has eluded theorists and practitioners alike for scores of years. As might be expected of any concept that has appeared to defy definition, there exists fairly widespread disagreement among the experts as to just what it involves. Some people contend that while leadership is of the utmost importance, and that no substitute exists for it, leadership cannot be created or promoted or taught or learned. Rather, this line of reasoning holds that leadership is an art not a science, and that a science can be learned but an art cannot.

Other people define leadership simply getting people to work to achieve common goals of the enterprise·giving people something to work for. Still other people hold that leadership is the ability to influence the behavior of others, set up goals, formulate paths to the goals, and create some social norms. Another concept of lead

. . .
nsiderate of and concerned about their subordinates. This dimension of leadership is associated with leadership qualities of friendliness, consultation with subordinates, recognition of subordinates, open communication, supportiveness, and representation of subordinates' interests. 2. Initiating Structure. This style of leadership is characterized by a strong focus on job tasks. The leader is concerned about utilizing resources and personnel to effectively achieve group goals. Qualities associated with this dimension of leadership style include planning, coordinating, directing, problem-solving, clarifying subordinates' roles, criticizing poor work, and pressuring subordinates to work more effectively. Modifications of the Leadership Style Model are numerous, and have been made both by the model developers and by others. The most significant refinement divides leadership style into two categories, as follows (Fleishman, Harris & Burtt (1985): 1. Employee-Oriented Style. This style is similar to the consideration dimension. This aspect of leadership style refers to a leader who is high in consideration of subordinates, supportive, and non-punitive. Such a leader is open in downward communication and focuses in on ways
. . .

Some common words found in the essay are:
According Heider, Theory Concepts, Larson LaFasto, MacKenzie Bommer, Ouchi Jaeger, Theory Theory, Pawar Eastman, Bernard Bass, Peters Waterman, Chrislip Larson, gardner 1990, transformational leadership, heider 1988, organizational commitment, job satisfaction, organizational conflict, organizational structure, transactional leadership, leadership style, organizational culture, larson lafasto 1994, gardner 1990 contended, chrislip larson 1997, schweiger sapienza 1995, mahler nicholson 1994,
Approximate Word count = 9381
Approximate Pages = 38 (250 words per page)

More Essays on Leadership Styles & Organizational Performance