The differences between a boss and a leader is one of the primary things the head of an organization must educate himself/herself about. There are no particular combination of traits and skills that make a successful leader, only different characteristics in differing circumstances that the leader is expected to abide by. The essay takes the case study of Louise, the supervisor of a small assembly unit of a manufacturing company, whose skills and efficiency cannot compensate for her lack of leadership quality. The discussion analyzes the personality traits of the mentioned leader, and uses relevant leadership and personality theories to illustrate theoretical arguments on personalities (Chuang, 2013). The main body of the discussion elucidates on the nature, personality traits and characteristic of Louis and bases this discussion to determine her shortcomings as a leader and the ways it can affect (negatively) the employees who work under her. Finally, this essay concludes with some suggestions for Louise to improve her leadership skills.
After being promoted to the post of a supervisor, Louise, a reliable and efficient worker of a manufacturing company, proved herself an inconsiderate, overbearing and borderline arrogant superior whose behavior and domineering nature has been bothering employees. The tea club, organized by the members of the team was looked after by junior staff member Sanjay, who was penalized by Louise after the money collected from the member went missing. Turns out the money was borrowed by Phyllis, a team member who felt compelled to take such a drastic step when her mother had to be rushed to the hospital as she needed cash for reaching there by taxi. Despite Phyllis having sorted out the matter and returning the money she had borrowed, Louise contested that she (Phyllis) should be charged for gross misconduct and decided to take disciplinary action against her which could get her terminated from office.
Louise is evidently an autocratic leader who does not consult with her team before taking any organizational and managerial decision. She is rather bossy and prefers her authority remain unquestioned and her verdicts adhered to. Her rigid and authoritarian nature intimidates the workers and they have justifiable reasons to fear and even despise her. The rash decisions she comes to without being considerate of the workers is indicative of her imprudence. Had any other leader with efficient leadership skills, been in her position, he/she would have a totally different take on the situation. Louise may be a highly productive and reliable worker but she is clearly not well-adept with human resource management and the ways to handle a team during minor glitches. Her leadership traits can be compared and contrasted using leadership theories (Schoemaker, Krupp, and Howland 2013). A participative leader for instance, aims to include all members of the group in the decision making process. This commits team members to actions and make them more collaborative than competitive which is better for achieving joint goals. This is a form of democratic leadership where the leader consults, empowers and shares the power with the teammates. A participative leader would have run the decision through the staff before declaring an extreme verdict like termination of an employee on dubious grounds. Renesis Likert recognized four different styles of leaderships, revolving around employee involvement and decision-making. Two of which are exploitative authoritative and benevolent authoritative leadership. Leaders exhibiting the exploitative authoritative style, have little concern for employees and resorts to regressive methods like threats, instilling fear and other extreme steps for achieving conformance. These leaders avoid personal communication and ignore the psychologically distant concerns of employees. Louis, is evidently an exploitative authoritative leader who uses threat and induces fear in workers to attain company objectives. On the other hand, if a benevolent authoritative leader had been in her place, she/he would be sensitive even towards the lower concerns of the team members.
This case must be analyzed using the theories of situational leadership. This form suggests that the actions and decisions of the leader is wholly dependent on situational factors. Situational decisions are inevitably affected by factors like follower’s capability and motivation. The decision is also eaffected by the relationship shared by the leaders and the followers. The leader is more influenced by the his/her perception of the followers than the circumstance itself. Further, the leader’s perception of t ‘self’, his/her mood, temperament, level of emotional intelligence are also determiners and potential modifiers in the leader’s behavior. Leaders following situational leadership focus on factors like resource acquisition, external relationships, and managing the structure, culture and demands of the group. The leader’s action is also affected by situational forces, the forces in both the follower and the leader. The action of the leader is therefore highly variable and something as remotely unrelated as a family feud or any other personal issue can displace the leader’s decision and behavior. The case study sheds very little light on the personal life of Louise but her constant discontent and unnecessary rigidity with workers and her failure in motivating and reaching out to employees might indicate personal conflicts that needs resolution.
The five personality factors a leader is supposed to exhibit are neuroticism, extraversion, conscientiousness, agreeableness and openness. This principle is popularly known as the CANOE model of leadership (Altmäe, Türk, & Toomet, 2013) Conscientiousness can be described as a person’s tendency to be organized, controlled and dependable. Agreeableness is the extent to which an individual is nurturing, accepting and trusting. Neuroticism is an individual’s vulnerability to anxiety, depression and insecurity while openness is referred to the insightful, creative and curious nature of the individual. Inculcating these five factors have been reported to be effective for strategic leadership and human resource management. Louise’s indifference to these factors are reflected in her behavior towards the workers and her random decisions taken without considering the welfare of the employees. Emotional intelligence, sociability, integrity and perseverance are personality traits that are deeply associated with effective leadership (Iqbal, Anwar & Haider, 2015). Sociability accounts for the leader’s ability to maintain cordial relationships with workers even during difficult and critical times. An efficient leader is friendly, tactful, courteous and diplomatic. Perseverance is another crucial personality trait of a good leader. Leadership is an arduous, long and tedious process and a leader must be determined and perseverant both of the process and of the people he/she is working with. The most important characteristic a leader must inculcate is emotional intelligence. It can be defined as an individual’s ability to be empathetic towards the emotions of others and be in control of one’s own emotional commotions. Louis demonstrates a visible lack of emotional intelligence through her harsh decision of sacking Phyllis, who had no ill intention in her mind while borrowing the money from the safe. An emotionally intelligent person would be able to understand and empathize with someone whose rash action may have caused inconvenience to the ones around him/her. Proper management of human resource requires the manager to be emotionally understanding of the workers, be patient and empathetic towards their shortcomings and misdoings. Leaders also need to maintain integrity towards the organization and the workers. A loyal, dependable, responsible and honest leader is more capable of uniting workers and goading them towards a common goal.
The contingency theory of leadership when a leader is contingent on the situational factors like behaviors and capabilities of workers and the preferred leadership style of the leader. This theory is assertive of the relativity of leadership since it maintains that no leadership can follow the same style in different situations. The variables of the situation is to be considered before the leader takes any situation. What Phyllis did would appear entirely abominable, unless the reason behind her action is brought to notice. The action must be judged against the intention for a rational and justified decision-making. What Louise follows can be categorized under transactional leadership theory; this style has a clear hierarchical structure where the employees are obligated to follow the rules and be answerable to the manager/leader. She expects her workers to strictly abide her rules and does not encourage any involvement of the workers in her plans and decisions. This style of leadership is not favorable for employee motivation as they might feel forcefully entitled to certain actions and feel increasingly detached from their work.
Jeff Bezoz the founder and CEO of Amazon is considered the top most efficient leader in the world for his outstanding organizational skills and democratic way of leading. He follows the transformational leadership style for organizing his teams for different projects. Mark Parker’s (CEO of Nike) participatory leadership has acquired him the success he deserves and continues to reach greater heights with an approach that treats every employee of the company the same way.
Chuang, S. F. (2013). Essential skills for leadership effectiveness in diverse workplace development.
Ebrahimi Mehrabani, S., & Azmi Mohamad, N. (2015). New approach to leadership skills development (developing a model and measure). Journal of Management Development, 34(7), 821-853.
Iqbal, N., Anwar, S., & Haider, N. (2015). Effect of leadership style on employee performance. Arabian Journal of Business and Management Review, 5(5), 1-6.
Miao, Q., Newman, A., & Huang, X. (2014). The impact of participative leadership on job performance and organizational citizenship behavior: Distinguishing between the mediating effects of affective and cognitive trust. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 25(20), 2796-2810.
Schoemaker, P. J., Krupp, S., & Howland, S. (2013). Strategic leadership: The essential skills. Harvard business review, 91(1), 131-134.
Altmäe, S., Türk, K., & Toomet, O. S. (2013). Thomas-Kilmann’s Conflict Management Modes and their relationship to Fiedler’s Leadership Styles (basing on Estonian organizations). Baltic Journal of Management, 8(1), 45-65.
Essay Writing Service Features
Our Experience
No matter how complex your assignment is, we can find the right professional for your specific task. Contact Essay is an essay writing company that hires only the smartest minds to help you with your projects. Our expertise allows us to provide students with high-quality academic writing, editing & proofreading services.
Free Features
Free revision policy
$10Free bibliography & reference
$8Free title page
$8Free formatting
$8How Our Essay Writing Service Works
First, you will need to complete an order form. It's not difficult but, in case there is anything you find not to be clear, you may always call us so that we can guide you through it. On the order form, you will need to include some basic information concerning your order: subject, topic, number of pages, etc. We also encourage our clients to upload any relevant information or sources that will help.
Complete the order form
Once we have all the information and instructions that we need, we select the most suitable writer for your assignment. While everything seems to be clear, the writer, who has complete knowledge of the subject, may need clarification from you. It is at that point that you would receive a call or email from us.
Writer’s assignment
As soon as the writer has finished, it will be delivered both to the website and to your email address so that you will not miss it. If your deadline is close at hand, we will place a call to you to make sure that you receive the paper on time.
Completing the order and download