Using Situational Leadership To Lead A New Team And Addressing An Ethical Dilemma

Raphael’s Unethical Practices

Question:

Discuss about the Motivating Contingency Leadership Model.

Raphael applies a combination of legitimate political and rewards power to lead his team of subordinates. The case study shows that he projected the targets achieved by his subordinates to gain recognition before the senior managers and the apex management. He did not consider it illegitimate to use the performances of his followers to gain his own recognition. However, it can be pointed out that he used his power unethically to gain more recognitions and rewards. It can be pointed out that these rewards and promotions would once again increase his power to project the performances of his followers to gain further promotions. Thus, Raphael used legitimate political power and rewards power to lead his team and take credit of its performances for his own professional benefits like promotion (Keskes 2014).

Barry should complain against the unethical practices of Raphael to exploit the performances of his team members to obtain his own professional development. He should complain to his skip level managers and the apex management about this unethical practices of Raphael. He should substantiate his complaints using statistical figures which would prove his high level performances before the senior management. He should also point out the devastating impacts of Raphael’s immoral activities on the motivation, morale and performances of the juniors. These strong evidences against Raphael would enable the apex management takes steps against him (Flin et al. 2013).

Politicking is the appropriate method, which Barry can use to highlight his own high performances before the apex management and his skip level manager. He can use five political ways to retaliate the unethical practices of Raphael. First, he can approach Raphael directly and speak to him about the unjust practices the latter is practicing. The case study show that Raphael and Barry were once peers and enjoyed great professional relationship. Barry can point out to Raphael that the practice of taking credit of his performances by the latter is having devastating impact on his motivation and hampering their career growth. If Raphael does not cooperate with Barry and uses his power to subdue him, Barry must use the second strategy of asserting his performances before the apex management and his skip level boss. He should support his claim of legitimacy of promotion to higher posts on the grounds of his high performances (Getha-Taylor et al. 2015). The third step would be forming coalition with other employees but it is not very prudent as Raphael might come know of his stances. This may give him scope to counteract Barry legitimate claims using his superior position in the organisation. The fourth approach, which Barry can take, is to appear indispensible before the management using his superior performances.  The last step, which Barry can take, is to obtain support the apex management, skip level boss and gain the permission to report directly to them. He might also gain the permission to join a different team (Carter et al. 2013). Thus, Barry can approach the apex management, appear indispensible, claim his legitimate right to take advantage of his high performances and gain the support of the management.

Barry’s Options to Address the Issue

Excessive whining and complaining against the seniors reveal the insecure position and the acute performance lack in employees. However, there are also other ways, which employees can take to complain against injustices. They can approach their skip level managers and bosses to complain against unfair treatments in the hands of their seniors. However, they must support their claims with strong evidences. This will make them claim appear legitimate and substantial thus enabling the management to take actions to deal with the matter (Namasivayam, Guchait and Lei 2014).

Barry can avoid being a whiner by substantiating his claims with statistics and figures proving his performances. This will allow the apex management and the skip level mangers to look into his matter. This will allow them to take legitimate actions to ensure that Barry gets due crefit for his performances and is not exploited by Raphael. This procedure of supporting his claims with proofs will help Barry to make his claim appear legitimate and not like whining (Dinh et al. 2014).

Barry should look for another job if the apex management is not able to give positive outcomes and take steps against Raphael. He should first approach Raphael and explain him the harmful effect his exploitative actions are having on his team members including himself(Barry). If his attempts to reconcile things with Raphael fail, he should approach the management to take actions against Raphael. He must substantiate his claim with figures proving his high level of performances. If the management fails to come up with a solution to the problem, then Barry must change his job. However, if the management succeeds in taking up steps against Raphael, he must not change his job (Thompson and Glasø 2015).

The situatiaonal leadership model is a leadership model developed by Paul Hersey and Ken Blanchard. The chart below shows situational leadership style stresses on both the attributes of the followers and the leadership styles the leaders can take to ensure these four classes of followers achieve their performance parameters. The four types of subordinates are low motivation and low task skills, high motivation and low task skills, low motivation and task skills and high motivation and high task skills. The theory also states the specific actions the leaders can apply in the case of these four readiness levels (McCleskey 2014).

Readiness level(of followers)	Leadership styles
R1	Low motivation and low task skills	S1	Telling
R2	High motivation and low task skills	S2	Selling
R3	Low motivation and task skills	S3	Participating
R4	High motivation and high task skills	S4	Delegating

Figure 1. Situational Leadership model

(Source: Author)

The first group of subordinates consist of employees with low motivational level and low task skills. These employees lack the professional experience and skills to achieve high level of professional performances. They lack motivation, which impedes them to acquiring new skills to improve their skills and efficiency. The leader in this case has to assume the ‘telling style’. He commands and gives specific instructions to the followers belonging to the low motivation and low task skill category (Sethuraman and Suresh 2014).

Avoiding Being a Whiner

The second category of employees fall under high motivation and low task skills. This category of employees has high level of motivation but lack the required skills and expertise. The heads of the departments in order to deal with these employees have to follow the ‘selling style’. The departmental heads, while leading subordinates, similar to telling style, issue commands and clear directions to them. However, in case of high motivation and low task skill group, the leaders interact more with their subordinates of this category compared to the first category. There are smooth exchanges of information between the superiors and the subordinates. The followers here are motivated and readily cooperate with the leaders if trained. The leaders offer training and mentoring to this group of employees to improve their efficiency (Khuong and Hoang 2015).

The third group of employees consist of employees having high task skills and low level of motivation. These employees have experience but lack the motivation to achieve high-level f performances. This lack of motivation stems from several factors like lack of self-esteem, lack of participative environment within their departments and weak organisational culture. The leaders in order to deal with these employees lack motivation in spite of having skills encourage them to participate in making strategies to achieve the assigned targets (Berg et al. 2016). The leaders here create a positive organisational culture and environment, which stimulates the employees to collaborate readily. They value relationships among the team members and themselves. Participating in making strategies encourage higher self-esteem among the employees which boosts their motivation. As a result, they start performing well which ultimately boosts the team performances (Hogan and Coote 2014). 

The fourth category of staff consists of employees having high level of task skills and high level of motivation. This category of employees is the most efficient among the four groups. They are highly motivated to perform and take up new responsibilities. Leaders apply delegating method while leading this category of workers. As a result, the leaders vest many responsibilities in the employees having high level of motivation and job skills. It can also be pointed out that employees having high level of efficiency and motivation usually have more chances of availing promotions. They as a result experience high level of job satisfaction and career development (Carlos Pinho, Paula Rodrigues and Dibb 2014). It can also be pointed out that employees having high level of skill and motivation contribute largely to the performance enhancement of their teams. As a result the leaders interact a lot with this group of followers and there is a high degree of collaboration between them once again, leading to high departmental or group performances.

Using the Situational Leadership Model to Lead a New Team

The case study of Barry reveals that he has a new team and can apply situational leadership theory to lead it.  It already says Barry has a new team and it can be assumed that the new team would consist of employees having various levels of skills and motivation. Since the team is new, it can be further assumed that the team would have inexperienced employees, some who have low level of motivation and others who lack it (Chatman et al. 2014). The team would also have the second category of employees with high motivation with low knowledge and skills. There would also be third category of employees having low motivation and high skills. The fourth group consists of employees having high level of experience, knowledge and motivation.

It can be pointed out that the team of Barry would have both senior and junior employees. However, being a new team it is likely to have more junior employees and less experienced employees compared to highly efficient and motivated employees. This combination of members in the new team under Barry show that it can led by applying situational leadership style (Wang, Noe and Wang 2014).

Barry can use ‘telling’ leadership skills to tackle the first group of employees containing low level of knowledge, experience and motivation. He should direct the inexperienced employees who are most probably newly hired employees. He should issue them clear instructions and guide them while they perform their duties (Keskes 2014). Flinx et al.(2013) further points out that the leader require to supervise and monitor the performances of these employees. The improvement in the performance of the employees would point out the outcome of the telling leadership style. Getha-Taylor et al.(2015) further points out that these employees with low skills can be trained to improve their performances. Barry can offer training to these low skilled employees to enhance their efficiency. This training would result in enhancement in the work standards of the employees, which would in turn boost their motivation. The employees after post training would be able to fulfil their job responsibilities better which would boost their confidence, efficiency and competencies. This would allow them to shift to the second category of workers having newly acquired skills but high level of motivation due to acquisition of new knowledge (Huang et al. 2014).

The next group of employees having newly acquired skills and high level of motivation would require Barry to use selling leadership style. This would involve Barry using his authority to direct and guide his juniors. These junior employees would still require training to enhance their skills and capabilities. However, the selling style differs from the telling styles. In case of telling style the employees lack both motivation and skill. Hence, the manager has to direct the employees and there is almost no interaction between the leader and the follower. The workers are motivated to work and improve their performance, which makes the manager interact with them more compared to the telling style.

Four Categories of Employees and Situational Leadership Styles

The third category of employees consists of senior and experienced employees lacking motivation, which would require Barry to use participating leadership style. According to Carter et al.(2013), the experienced employees play important roles like advising the team leaders and motivating the juniors in the team. However, lack of employee empowerment under Raphael and his taking credit for the high performances of the team led to low level of motivation among the senior employees. Barry can apply participating style of leadership so that they feel important. Namasivayam, Guchait and Lei (2014) state that empowerment of employees increases self esteem and motivation among senior employees. They participate more actively in the strategy making which ultimately enhance the performance of the team.

The fourth category consists of workers having level of skills and motivation, which would require Barry to use delegating style of leadership. These types of employees are high performers in whom Barry can vest crucial job responsibility.

The above discussion clearly shows that Barry can use situational leadership style of to manage his new team. This is because the theory recognises the four types of followers adn assigns a style of leadership appropriate to lead each type of follower. The subordinates having low scale of motivation and skill can be dealt with using telling leadership style. Barry can use selling style of leadership to lead subordinates having low skill but acquired motivation. He can use participation style to manage employees having high skill but low motivation. He can finally use delegation style of leadership to manage high performing workers having high rate of motivation (Huang et al. 2014).

Barry can use the situational leadership theory of contingency to manage his new team. The theory recognises four types of subordinates in professional teams and assigns four different leadership styles to lead these four types of subordinates. The first type consists of employees mostly newly hired having low scale of motivation and knowledge. Barry can manage these followers using the telling leadership style by ordering them and giving them clear directions. The second sort of followers is motivated but lack knowledge and experience. Barry can lead this sort of subordinates using the selling style where he other than ordering the employees also encourages them to participate in the team planning. Barry can use the third group of employees lacking motivation in spite of having knowledge by encouraging them to participate more proactively in team planning. This would create  a sense of importance and self esteem among these employees and they would be motivated to contribute towards team performance. The fourth group of employees consists of experienced, efficient and motivated employees. Barry should not intervene in their work. He should instead delegate them more power and promote them to higher offices to bring about their career growth. He should aim at retaining them by giving them benefits like salary hikes, perks and flexible timing facilities (Sethuraman and Suresh 2014).

Application of Situational Leadership to Barry’s New Team

Barry should use motivational tactics to manage the first three groups of employees to retain and develop their quality. He should train them to improve their skills and motivate them. He should mentor them and provide them with conductive working environment to improve their efficiency. This will ensure that Barry manages his team well and achieves high level of performance. This high level of team performance would bring the managerial qualities of Barry in light before the apex management. It would also pave ways for his further promotion (Carlos Pinho, Paula Rodrigues and Dibb 2014).

References:

Berg, M.E., Berg, M.E., Karlsen, J.T. and Karlsen, J.T., 2016. A study of coaching leadership style practice in projects. Management Research Review, 39(9), pp.1122-1142.

Carlos Pinho, J., Paula Rodrigues, A. and Dibb, S., 2014. The role of corporate culture, market orientation and organisational commitment in organisational performance: the case of non-profit organisations. Journal of Management Development, 33(4), pp.374-398.

Carter, M.Z., Armenakis, A.A., Feild, H.S. and Mossholder, K.W., 2013. Transformational leadership, relationship quality, and employee performance during continuous incremental organizational change. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 34(7), pp.942-958.

Chatman, J.A., Caldwell, D.F., O’Reilly, C.A. and Doerr, B., 2014. Parsing organizational culture: How the norm for adaptability influences the relationship between culture consensus and financial performance in high?technology firms. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 35(6), pp.785-808.

Dinh, J.E., Lord, R.G., Gardner, W.L., Meuser, J.D., Liden, R.C. and Hu, J., 2014. Leadership theory and research in the new millennium: Current theoretical trends and changing perspectives. The Leadership Quarterly, 25(1), pp.36-62.

Flin, R., Fioratou, E., Frerk, C., Trotter, C. and Cook, T.M., 2013. Human factors in the development of complications of airway management: preliminary evaluation of an interview tool. Anaesthesia, 68(8), pp.817-825.

Getha-Taylor, H., Fowles, J., Silvia, C. and Merritt, C.C., 2015. Considering the effects of time on leadership development: A local government training evaluation. Public Personnel Management, 44(3), pp.295-316.

Hogan, S.J. and Coote, L.V., 2014. Organizational culture, innovation, and performance: A test of Schein’s model. Journal of Business Research, 67(8), pp.1609-1621.

Huang, J.L., Ryan, A.M., Zabel, K.L. and Palmer, A., 2014. Personality and adaptive performance at work: A meta-analytic investigation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 99(1), p.162.

Keskes, I. (2014). Relationship between leadership styles and dimensions of employee organizational commitment: A critical review and discussion of future directions. Intangible Capital, 10(1).

Khuong, M.N. and Hoang, D.T., 2015. The effects of leadership styles on employee motivation in auditing companies in Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam. International Journal of Trade, Economics and Finance, 6(4), p.210.

McCleskey, J.A., 2014. Situational, transformational, and transactional leadership and leadership development. Journal of Business Studies Quarterly, 5(4), p.117.

Namasivayam, K., Guchait, P. and Lei, P., 2014. The influence of leader empowering behaviors and employee psychological empowerment on customer satisfaction. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 26(1), pp.69-84.

Sethuraman, K. and Suresh, J., 2014. Effective leadership styles. International Business Research, 7(9), p.165.

Thompson, G. and Glasø, L., 2015. Situational leadership theory: a test from three perspectives. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 36(5), pp.527-544.

Wang, S., Noe, R.A. and Wang, Z.M., 2014. Motivating knowledge sharing in knowledge management systems: A quasi–field experiment. Journal of Management, 40(4), pp.978-1009.