TABLE OF CONTENTS

ITEM

PAGE

Introduction .. Organization behavior and leadership .. Four styles of Leadership Relationship between Leadership and Motivation . Conclusion .

1 2 3 8 8 9

References

Introduction

he ai! of this essay is to discuss the perception of organization behavior and decision !a"ing in leadership process. It starts with the definition of organizational #ehavior$% and after that we can understand why it&s i!portance. Organizational behavior studies the influence that individuals' groups and organizational structure have on behavior within organizations. (Robins ) *udge' +,th'p.-.. Fro! this definition' we can say if we learn Organizational behavior' it will help us understand and predict hu!an behavior in an organization. here are !any reasons !a"e Organizational #ehavior beco!e i!portant in an organization. First of all' we have to "now !ost people are born and educated in organizations' ac/uire !ost of the !aterial possessions fro! organizations' and die as !e!bers of organizations. 0nd in our life' we can be consu!ers' !e!ber or e!ployee in an organization. 1e cannot say 2I don&t belong to any organization so I don&t care about that%. 3econd' the value of organizational behavior is that it isolates i!portant aspects of the !anager&s 4ob and offers specific perspectives on the hu!an side of !anage!ent. Finally' if we study about organizational behavior' we can clarify the factors that affect how !anagers !anage. Organizational behavior is defined as a field of study that investigates the i!pact that individuals' groups' and structure have on behavior within organizations for the purpose of applying such "nowledge toward i!proving an organization5s effectiveness (Robbins' -,,+' p. 6.. 0ccording to 1arren #ennis (-,,,789.' :;ood leaders !a"e people feel that they5re at the very heart of things' not at the periphery. <veryone feels that he or she !a"es a difference to the success of the organization. 1hen that happens people feel centered and that gives their wor" !eaning.: ;ood leaders "now the value of organizational behavior and how these behaviors add value to the business. hey also "now how to !a"e you feel as though you do !a"e a difference to the organization. hey "now that organizations are social syste!s' and not 4ust technical econo!ic syste!s. ;ood leaders depend on !ore than 4ust authority to influence e!ployees to wor" toward the achieve!ent of organizational goals. hey also depend on "nowledge gained in other areas such as psychology' sociology' anthropology' and political science to !otivate e!ployees. 0n organization is a social set up' which has a boundary that divides it fro! its environ!ent' pursues its own collective goals' and controls its own perfor!ance. In a for!al organization'
2 |Page

interactions are rationally coordinated and directed through ti!e on a continuous basis. person at the hel! of affairs is usually the leader (<"eland' -,,=..

he

Fry et al.' (-,,=. !entioned that the field of perfor!ance e>cellence has e!phasized the need to go beyond reporting financial !etrics to include non?financial predictors of financial perfor!ance such as custo!er satisfaction' organizational outputs such as /uality and delivery' process or internal operating !easures' and e!ployee co!!it!ent and growth Four Styles of Leadership Leadership style has been shown to be a !a4or factor in the effectiveness of the organization' and different leadership styles are so!eti!es !ore effective in different situations. @u#rin' Ireland' and 1illia!s (+686. note that effective organizational leaders are generally consistent in the way they try to influence the behavior of group !e!bers' with this consistent pattern of behavior being the leadership style of a given !anager. he behavior of !ost !anagers is too co!ple> to be described by a single style' and a !anager !ay !odify his or her style to !atch a given situation. @ifferent approaches have been used to try to categorize leadership style' using different ter!s and different criteria for analyzing the issue. he classical !ethod of classifying leadership styles is based on a continuu! of authority e>erted by the leader. he styles of leadership identified under this approach are autocratic' participative' and free?rein' as indicated by @u#rin' Ireland' and 1illia!s. he autocratic leader !aintains the !ost authority by issuing orders without consulting group !e!bers. Leadership style is the !anner and approach of providing direction' i!ple!enting plans' and !otivating people. Aurt Lewin (+6B6. led a group of researchers to identify different styles of leadership. his early study has been very influential and established three !a4or leadership styles7 (Lewin' LIippit' 1hite +6B6' C.3. 0r!y Dandboo"' +69B.7 autocratic or authoritarian participative or de!ocratic delegative or laissez?fair

3 |Page

0lthough good leaders use all three styles' with one of the! nor!ally do!inant' bad leaders tend to stic" with one style (nor!ally autocratic.. 0utocratic he authoritarian leadership style or autocratic leader "eeps strict' close control over followers by "eeping close regulation of policies and procedures given to followers. o "eep !ain e!phasis on the distinction of the authoritarian leader and their followers' these types of leaders !a"e sure to only create a distinct professional relationship. @irect supervision is what they believe to be "ey in !aintaining a successful environ!ent and follower ship. In fear of followers being unproductive' authoritarian leaders "eep close supervision and feel this is necessary in order for anything to be done. <>a!ples of authoritarian co!!unicative behavior7 a police officer directing traffic' a teacher ordering a student to do his or her assign!ent' and a supervisor instructing a subordinate to clean a wor"station. 0ll of these positions re/uire a distinct set of characteristics that give the leader the position to get things in order or get a point across. 0uthoritarian with followers'and donates interaction. Eaternalistic Leadership he way a Eaternalistic leader wor"s is by acting as a father figure by ta"ing care of their subordinates as a parent would. In this style of leadership the leader supplies co!plete concern for his followers or wor"ers. In return he receives the co!plete trust and loyalty of his people. 1or"ers under this style of leader are e>pected to beco!e totally co!!itted to what the leader believes and will not strive of and wor" independently. he relationship between these co? wor"ers and leader are e>tre!ely solid. he wor"ers are e>pected to stay with a co!pany for a longer period of ti!e because of the loyalty and trust. Fot only do they treat each other li"e fa!ily inside the wor" force' but outside too. hese wor"ers are able to go to each other with any proble!s they have regarding so!ething because they believe in what they say is going to truly help the!. raits7 sets goals individually' engages pri!arily in one?way and downward co!!unication' controls discussion

4 |Page

One of the downsides to a paternalistic leader is that the leader could start to play favorites in decisions. his leader would include the wor"ers !ore apt to follow and start to e>clude the ones who were less loyal. In today&s !ar"et paternalis! is !ore difficult to co!e by according to Eadavic and <arnest who wrote 2business di!ensional and Organizational Counseling.% believe this because there have beco!e !ore lay?offs and stronger unionization. hey his affects

paternalistic leaders because the co?wor"ers !ay not believe that their 4obs are +,,G ensured. 1hen this happens' wor"ers begin to loo" for bigger and better 4ob opportunities instead of staying at one co!pany for a longer period of ti!e. #ecause of this' he leader !ay be thin"ing that you could be leaving and not fully believe you when you tell the! so!ething about a 4ob opportunity. his could put the wor"ers and leader at ris" for a bad situation. 0ccording to #. M. #ass who wrote Leadership and Eerfor!ance #eyond <>pectations' wor"ers who follow paternalistic leadership also have better organization s"ills. he leader encourages organization because they allow the wor"ers to co!plete tas"s so that they can stay on top of their wor". he wor"ers co!plete tas"s this boosts self?confidence and it !a"es the! wor" harder to reach a goal and e>ceed the goal to prove to their boss they are wor"ing hard. Daving this style of leadership can also help i!ple!ent a reward syste!. his syste! will allow their wor"ers to wor" even better because there is so!ething for the! at the end of the tunnel. 1hile doing this they will also be able to acco!plish !ore wor" in a set ti!e fra!e. @e!ocratic he de!ocratic leadership style consists of the leader sharing the decision?!a"ing abilities with group !e!bers by pro!oting the interests of the group !e!bers and by practicing social e/uality. his style of leadership enco!passes discussion' debate and sharing of ideas and encourage!ent of people to feel good about their involve!ent. he boundaries of de!ocratic participation tend to be circu!scribed by the organization or the group needs and the instru!ental value of people5s attributes (s"ills' attitudes' etc... he de!ocratic style enco!passes the notion that everyone' by virtue of their hu!an status' should play a part in the group5s decisions. Dowever' the de!ocratic style of leadership still re/uires guidance and control by a specific leader. he de!ocratic style

5 |Page

de!ands the leader to !a"e decisions on who should be called upon within the group and who is given the right to participate in' !a"e and vote on decisions. elationship !et"een leadership and #oti$ation Research on !otivation and leadership continued for !any years with little interaction between the two areas' although !ore recently !otivational concepts have been drawn upon to understand leadership processes. Many !otivational theories were posited to have direct i!plications for leader behaviour' however the evidence for !otivational i!pact is unclear. 0s !otivation is an abstract construct' !otives can only be inferred fro! reports or perfor!ance outco!es' not directly !easured. Ma"ing these inferences are difficult because of the co!ple>' dyna!ic and !ulti?causal nature of the concept' and wide variations in e>pression' further!ore there is considerable debate concerning the nature of the Leadership construct' which we shall discuss elsewhere on the foru!. hese issues !a"e an assess!ent of the i!pact (effect or influence. of leadership on !otivation at wor"' a difficult tas". 3o' do leaders !otivate$ Firstly' we need to unpac" a little what we !ean by H!otivation&. @efinitions concern influences on the direction' vigour and persistence of action. 1or" conte>ts are broad and varied' however in !ost cases organizations need people to be attracted to their organization and stay' perfor! tas"s in a dependable !anner and to do so in creative and innovative ways. 1hilst one could argue that the latter re/uire!ent is not always present in wor" situations' !otivation is of increasing interest as a potential e>planation for wor"ers productivity' effort and attendance. Dow can we assess and !easure what i!pact leadership has upon this process$ In !any cases the i!pact of leadership on !otivation tends to be inferred by outco!es' particularly focusing on group or co!pany perfor!ance' although wor" has been carried out on absenteeis! (see Eorter' #igley ) 3teers' -,,B.. Dowever it is possible that a leader can !otivate subordinates without this !a"ing any difference to effort or outco!es' conversely there are !any other things a leader can do to i!prove perfor!ance that are not lin"ed to !otivation' therefore such studies are li!ited. Other research uses !ultiple levels (e.g. follower' leader' leaders& supervisor. often of perfor!ance ratings or constructs such as 4ob satisfaction and organizational co!!it!ent. 0lthough it has been suggested that !ore satisfied wor"ers have a greater chance to perceive
6 |Page

their 4obs as !otivating and ta"e advantage of !otivational interventions' the lin" between these concepts and !otivation is unclear. Further!ore' research on attributional biases suggests individuals often view leaders as !a"ing a difference only in retrospect' therefore such ratings are prone to error (see e.g. Che!ers +669.. Indeed such a broad range of !easure!ent have been used' that this !a"es co!parisons difficult' increasing the potential for confounding. Much research is correlational' !a"ing causal direction i!possible to assess' and !any other variables which cannot be controlled for are li"ely to influence findings. hese issues of !easure!ent have considerable i!plications for evaluation of research and theories' but firstly we should consider in what ways theories !ay infor! us of a leadership?!otivation lin". 3teers et al.' (+66I. suggest Hone of the !ost i!portant i!pacts of organizational leadership' whether it be effective or ineffective' is on the !otivation of organizational !e!bers& (pI+8.' but the lin"s between leadership and !otivation are often i!plicit. 0 great variety of theories of !otivation e>ist' and a correspondingly great nu!ber of leadership theories have been developed' so!e we can discuss elsewhere on this foru!.. heories of !otivation can be classified on a continuu! fro! pro>i!al to distal (distance fro! actual behaviour.' and content (dispositionalJchoice focus. or process (perceptionJvolition focus.. It is !ost li"ely that leadership behaviour will affect !ore pro>i!al and processual aspects of !otivation' !a"ing these theories !ore li"ely to infor!. Motivational theories such as Maslow&s hierarchy of needs are still used to help understanding' but as little research supports the ideas these have been ta"en over by goal setting and e>change based theories of !otivation. In ter!s of leadership' path?goal theory' and theories of transfor!ation versus transactional leadership' have ta"en over fro! so!e of the earlier ideas. Dowever' I will leave the theory for another day' and concentrate right now on two types of leadership K those at the top of the organization' and those in charge of tea!s7 a. Organizational Leaders Much research assu!es a lin" between C<O leadership' !otivation and perfor!ance' but there is controversy over leadership i!pact on organizational perfor!ance. @e Lries (+66I. argues for lin"s between top leaders and high perfor!ing organizations' although little robust e!pirical wor" is cited. 3o!e suggest these outco!es are partly due to
7 |Page

ransfor!ational for!s of

Leadership' although the lin"s are unclear' and even the !ore acade!ic research has serious wea"nesses. It is possible the outco!es considered are too far re!oved fro! the construct of !otivation' perhaps the results will be clearer if we consider tea!s$ b. ea! Leaders 3o!e evidence indicates that if a Leader is !issing' !e!ber !otivation !ay be low' i!plying that si!ply having a leader can increase !otivation. Others argue that substitutes for leadership can !a"e a leaders role unnecessary' however research indicates that leader effects are not neutralised' suggesting an e!otional bond with a leader cannot be replaced (in Che!ers +669.. Further!ore !uch of the Hsubstitutes& research replaces aspects that !any would define as Manage!ent rather than Leadership. 3o!e suggest the presence of well?defined leaders !ay reduce a group&s ability to e>peri!ent' this view is supported by evidence that Charis!atic leaders !ay deny e!power!ent K for so!e individuals this !ay result in de?!otivation' although again' little syste!atic research has been carried out on this. It has also been shown that in routine reliable perfor!ance areas' charis!atic leadership effects are neutralised (see Dowell ) Costley' -,,I.. Research fro! a 3ocial <>change perspective suggests particular for!s of tea! leadership can e!power subordinates' which leads to increased satisfaction and fairness perceptions' and i!proved perfor!ance. here is also evidence of a significant relationship between delegation and subordinate perfor!ance and satisfaction. @eci (+66,. argues that social influence strategies can attenuate intrinsic !otivationM if one accepts a definition of leadership as a social influence process this suggests a positive influence for leadership. Net there is evidence that non? contingent rewards and punish!ent are ineffective and !ay de!otivate

he above evidence' although !i>ed' does suggest potential negative and positive effects of leadership on follower !otivation' however' !ost of the cited research is correlational' therefore no causal direction can be proven' constructs are often a!biguous' and !any studies are wea"ened by attributional biases. Eerhaps difficulties with finding evidence are due to there being no leadership i!pact on !otivation at all$
8 |Page

Fo Leadership I!pact$ 3o!e argue that leadership is purely an e>planatory category' used after the event' due to attributional and prototype processes and a need for causal and controlling principles. It is suggested that leadership' in reality' has no direct i!pact. Others suggests this argu!ent is !isplaced' as it is 4ust as li"ely attributions of outco!es to leadership is widespread because of direct e>perience of leadership effects. Dowever' the evidence suggests leadership is often attributed after the event' (3teers et al. +66I. lending weight to constructionist argu!ents. Others argue that !uch e!ployee !otivation is actually out of a leaders control (3ha!ir et. al +66I.' due to the !ultitude of !eanings that originate outside the organization' however it is ac"nowledged that these !eanings can be influenced through the leadership function' influencing organizational culture' perhaps this is a "ey to !otivation$ achieve goals. he ne>t article will consider this aspect. Motivation is goal?oriented behavior' and leaders influence behavior to o foster and sustain !otivation on the part of subordinates' leaders carefully !anage individual and organizational perfor!ance to attain goals that are clearly achievable. <>pectations Eersonal needs and e>pectations drive !otivation. Individuals e>pect their efforts to result in specific outco!es such as pay' recognition' survival or avoidance of punish!ent. Leaders develop responses to goal?oriented behaviors that are valued by subordinates and apply those responses in a fair and consistent !anner. Eerfor!ance Motivation re/uires a belief in one5s ability to acco!plish the !ission. Individuals are less li"ely to wor" toward a goal if it has little or no probability of success. <ffective leaders co!!unicate with subordinates to assess levels of !aturity' s"ill and self?estee!. hey conduct the training' !entoring and coaching necessary to build confidence and develop !ission?essential s"ills. Co!!it!ent @eci (+66,76. notes that' 2Motivation re/uires a level of co!!it!ent on the part of an individual or group. Co!!it!ent thrives in environ!ents characterized by open co!!unication' trust and
9 |Page

integrity. Dighly effective leaders listen carefully and spea" candidly. hey balance the needs of the individual with the needs of the larger organization and ensure that goals are both clearly defined and achievable. Leadership7 0 consistent e>a!ple of rising above any and all circu!stances. Leadership is e>ternal. Motivation7 he inner "nowledge or insight that !a"es rising above circu!stances possible.

Motivation co!es fro! within. In conclusion' leadership is not about encouraging' pushing or cheering onM it&s about pointing others inward so they recognize that the ability to be !otivated rests with the!. If you are a parent' for instance' you "now that it is virtually i!possible to !otivate your children to wor" hard at their studies. #ut you can lead. Nou can show your children' by e>a!ple' that no !atter how sic" you !ight get or how difficult your circu!stances !ight appear' you can passionately apply yourself to your own 4ob or pro4ects. hereby pointing your children inward to their innate ability to rise above any circu!stance (and e>cuse. and crac" the boo"s with pride and vigor. It can be therefore concluded that great leaders serve to bring out the inner wisdo! and free will of those they serve. Instead of inducing people to view life situations a certain way (or their way.' great leaders de!onstrate that there are an infinite nu!ber of ways to view any life situation.

eferences Che!ers' M.M. (+669.. An Inte%rati$e Theory of Leadership' Lawrence <rlbau! 0ssociates. @eci' <.L. ) Ryan' R.M.' (+66,. H0 #oti$ational approach to self& inte%ration in personality' in (A( )ienst!ier (ed. Eerspectives on !otivation' Febras"a 3y!posiu! on Motivation'

10 | P a g e

@e Lries' M.A.' (+66I.. HLeaders *ho Ma+e a )ifference'' <uropean Manage!ent *ournal vol. +O' no. =' p.O8I?O6O Dersey' E. ) A.D. #lanchard (+66,.. Mana%e#ent of Or%ani,ational Beha$ior. <nglewood Cliffs' Few *ersey7 Erentice?Dall. Dowell' *.E. ) Costley' @.L. (-,,I.. -nderstandin% !eha$iors for effecti$e leadership. -nd edition. Eearson. Eorter' L.1.' #igley' ;.0. ) 3teers' R.M. (-,,B.. Moti$ation and "or+ !eha$iour' 9th edition' Mc;raw?Dill. 3ha!ir' #.' Douse' R.*. ) 0arthur' M.#. (+66I.. H The Moti$ational Effects of Charis#atic Leadership& A Self.Concept Based Theory&' in 3teers' R.M.' Eorter' L.1.' ) #igley' ;.0.' Motivation and Leadership at 1or"' Ith <dition' Mc;raw?Dill International. Aouzes' *.M. ) #.P. Eosner (+689.. The Leadership Challen%e. 3an Francisco7 *ossey?#ass. 3chultz' @uane E. 3chultz' 3ydney <llen (-,+,.. Psycholo%y and "or+ today & An introduction to industrial and or%ani,ational psycholo%y (+,th ed. ed... Cpper 3addle River' F.*.7 Erentice Dall. p. -,+. 1arren #ennis (-,,,.. Or%ani,ation !eha$ior. Few Nor"7 Erentice Dall.

11 | P a g e