Human Nature Theories And Leadership Styles Management Essay

military personnel Nature Theories And Leadership Styles Management EssayWhen a film director is sent from his/her home country to manage either a heathenly divergent or a highly diverse take to the woodsforce, such a passenger vehicle al pitiful for most likely face many puzzles. Some of the problems ar culturally contingent. This officiate run intos at problems faced by an Ameri mess coach-and-four when he relocates to japan as a head of difference in their asterisk dahs.the States managers relocating to lacquer argon cosmos considered in this piece of work as a dis adjudicatent of various reasons.japan is regarded as one of the leading economies in the industrialized world. It is the gage largest economy. lacquer is regarded as the Statess fourth largest export market and is the second largest outside(prenominal) investor in America (U.S. De bankruptment of Commerce).Trade between America and japan has had its ups and downs due to conflicts and tighter tra de restrictions by japan. However as a result of research done, The New York Times (1991) proposed that American companies operating in Japan now face fewer trade restrictions. Also, many companies were said to go it away lucrative returns. American companies such as IBM, Bank of America and new(prenominal)s were regarded as successful in Japan. Nipponese companies such as Toyota operating in America also send American managers that atomic number 18 their employees to the head world power in Japan to get more understanding of the corporate agriculture, cordial processes, e.t.c. alone these and more have necessitated the need to look at lead names of two(prenominal) countries and try to find a dumb nominate that would work for the American manager and Japanese employees he would be leading in order to distract conflicts, lack of cooperation, tension, lack of productiveness that may result from incompatibility of the manager and the employees.The topic testamenting A s earlier stated, the problems faced by an American manager who has to relocate to a branch of the political party in Japan lead be examined and analyzed by looking at the divergent leading drifts, theories on lead and role of culture in find leadership styles. Leadership styles of America and Japan leave alone be set, abstract of the link between theories with practice get out be done, the workable similarities/differences he will face, problems encountered and possible solutions to those problems will be identified before arriving at a conclusion.GENERAL OVERVIEW antithetical definitions of leadership have been proposed overtime. According to Hogetts and Luthans (2003), leadership is the process of influencing community to direct their efforts towards proceeding of some particular goals or goals. Ho economic consumption et al (2004) defined leadership as the susceptibility of a person to influence, motivate and enable others to contribute toward the effectiveness a nd success of the governments of which they are members.Leadership style OverviewThe style of the leader is considered to be very all- key(a) in achieving organizational goals as it can induce performance among subordinates (BarlingBersonandZacharatos).Different leadership styles have been proposed by various scholars. Two models will be considered in this work Transformational and Transactional leadership styles proposed by James Macgregor Burns (1978) and, Directive, Supportive, Participative and Achievement-Oriented leadership styles developed by House (1971, 1974) but with focus on Houses model as this makes comparison between American and Japanese leadership styles easier.TransformationalThis leadership style has overtime demonstrated benefits over the transactional style in achieving organizational goals. (McColl-Kennedy and Andreson, 2002). Transformational leaders are those that lead by stimulating and inspiring their pursual to achieve extraordinary outcomes and in the process, develop their own leadership capacity. (Bass and Riggio 2006). Transformational leaders inspire their following(a) to do more than they originally intended or thought possible. This transformation occurs through individual interactions between leaders and subordinates, in particular through the manner in which transformational leaders communicate with subordinates.TransactionalTransactional leaders, on the other hand, lead through social metamorphose. Transactional leaders offer or span rewards for productivity or lack of it (Burns, 1978). They engage in a process of negotiation, offering subordinates rewards in exchange for the attainment of specific goals and completion of agreed-upon confinements (Bass, 1985).As earlier stated, focus will be on the different leadership styles developed by House (1971, 1974) in his path-goal surmisal. This was developed to explain how the conduct of a leader affects the performance and satisfaction of subordinates. The following le adership behaviours/styles were identifiedDirective Leadership telling subordinates what to do, giving specific guidance along the way, scheduling and coordinating things to be done and, asking them to follow rules and procedures. (Yukl, 2002). This should be applied in environments where there is good chooseance of hierarchies. (Mohr, 2010). This style increases the followers sense of security.Supportive Leadership this involves giving consideration to the needs of subordinates, macrocosmness concerned for their welfare and creating a friendly work environment (Yukl, 2002). Should be applied in environments with strong group orientation (Mohr, 2010).Participative involves consulting with subordinates and taking their opinions and suggestions into vizor when making decisions (Yukl, 2002, Kreitner et al, 2002). Should be applied in environments with strong equality and laissez faire (Mohr, 2010). This come up works best when subordinates are experts in their palm and can give advice when needed.Achievement Oriented involves setting challenging goals in work and self-improvement, seeking high standards and performance improvement. Also showing confidence in abilities of subordinates (Yukl, 2002). Should be used in environments with strong individualism and pragmatism where result-orientation and feat are the main motivational factors (Mohr, 2010). lead THEORIESTheories on leadership are philosophical assumptions that help leaders know how to direct their subordinates most effectively. in that location are various theories supporting the concept of leadership style. They aid account statement and proper understanding of leadership styles. Theories to be considered in this assignment areMcGregors Human nature theory ( theory X and Y)Ouchis theory (Theory Z)Douglas McGregors Human Nature Theory (Theory X and Y)According to Hodgetts and Luthans (2003), Theory X and Y are deuce philosophical assumptions which Douglas McGregor labelled to understand the humanity nature.Theory X assumes that people are basically lazy and, coercion and threats of penalty are often necessary to get them to work. In this case, leadership style has to be controlling and monitoring. Specifically, the theory assumes thatBy nature, people do non like to work and so avoid it whenever possible.The individual is evil and will always want to cheat.Workers have little ambition, try to avoid state and want to be directed.The main need of employees is handicraft security.To get people to attain organizational objectives, it is essential to use coercion, control and threats of punishment.The Theory Y is based on the assumption that under the right conditions, people will work hard and also seek increase responsibility and challenge. Specifically, the theory assumes that,Individuals want to respected, allowed to show initiative, and given autonomy and responsibility.Using physical and mental effort at work is as natural to people as resting or playing.Externa l control and threats of punishment are not the only(prenominal) ways of getting people to work towards achieving organizational objectives if people are committed to a goal, they will purpose self-direction and self control. trueness to objectives is de circumstanceined by rewards associated with their achievement. beneath proper conditions, the average human being learns not only to accept but also to seek responsibility.The ability to employ a reasonably high degree of imagination, ingenuity and creativeness in the solution of organizational problem is widely distributed throughout the population.Under condition of modern industry life, the intellectual potential of the average human begin is only partly tapped.Ouchis Theory ZThe Theory Z approach to management simply suggests that involved workers are the key to increased productivity (Workman, 2008). Ouchis Theory Z recommends how employees should be motivated for increased productivity. (Woodman/Workman, 2008). This approac h promotes participation in leadership.Involvement leads to the development of trust relationships and highly viscid work groups (this tends to compel even greater involvement).Employees will be cheery in the healthy social environment thus created.Detailed policies and rules to prevail and slow employees behaviour at work will not be needed.Employees will be trusted to do the right thing and managers, to look out for employees welfare.The result will be a level of productivity superior to that achieved at similar non-Theory Z firms.ROLE OF CULTUREIn looking at leadership styles, it is important to note that culture plays an important role in forming and understanding leadership styles/pattern. Therefore, a deeper understanding of American and Japanese culture is essential in the context of this work.There are cultural differences in America and Japan and, Hofstedes dimensions Power Distance, Uncertainty Avoidance, individualization/Collectivism, Masculinity/Feminism (England, 1 983) will be considered in understanding these differences and similarities.From his dimensions, the following index was developedValuesCountryIndividualismLong term orientationPower distanceUncertainty avoidanceMasculinityAmerica9129404662Japan4680549295 circumvent 1 cover the index of America and Japan utilise the Hofstedes dimension.Source Adapted from Mohr, 2010.Comparator (dimension)AmericaJapanPower distance minuscule upliftedIndividualismHighLowMasculinityHighHighUncertainty avoidanceLowHighLong term orientationLowHigh tabularize 2 demonstrate the variation between America and Japan using Hofstedes dimension.After looking at Hofstedes dimensions, main points of American and Japanese work culture will be highlighted.The table below points out the highlights of American organizational/work culture.American Work/Organizational finishAmericanIndividualistic, self-reliant and allowed to take decisions on their ownMaterialistic goals take antecedency over spiritual valuesFast work pace/ gaitOpportunistic, take risks and want immediate profitStart meeting with humour, chatting and use first namesBlunt, like to negotiate and get oral savvy at the first meetingQuick to hire and plunder spatial relation accorded on basis of merit/achievement and wealth. Age, seniority and gender is for the most part unimportantEthnocentric and assume they are the bestSpecialists in their fieldsJapanese Work/Organizational CultureJapaneseCulturally different from everyone elseHave great power in conformity with Confucian hierarchy but little involvement in daily affairs of the organizationOn appropriate occasions, policies/ideas are initiated from the factory floor and passed up the company hierarchy for approval and ratification in what is known as ringi-sho consensus collectivised and cant take decisions on their own. They have to refer back to their stage Office. As a result, dont make decisions in the first meeting faint not direct/blunt. Dont want to lose face or ha ve their feelings hurtLife-long employment with organizationGeneralists, not specialistsLife-long avocation rotationTable 3 Lewis (2006)After the review of leadership styles and theories, and culture of America and Japan ( two generally and within the organization), leadership styles in America and Japan will now be analyzedLEADERSHIP STYLE IN the StatesAmerican leaders have a unique leadership motivation style that integrates the features which most closely fit with their cultural characteristics. Their leadership style is participative (Bass, 1990. Mohr, 2010). This leadership style matches/is in post with the high individuality and low power distance found in Hofstedes dimensions.Also, elements of Theory Y (paternalistic) and theory Z (participative) can be found in their leadership style.LEADERSHIP STYLE IN JAPANThe management style in Japan is a mix of participative and directive approach as was found in the research carried out by Spicer and Fukushige (2007). This leadership style matches/is in line with the low individuality, high power distance, and high uncertainty avoidance found in Hofstedes dimensions. Elements of theory Z (participative) can be found in their leadership style. Japanese leaders use a blend of both task-centred and people-centred approaches to lead subordinates (Workman, 2008).However, in the research done by Fukushige and Spicer (2007), it was found that Japanese employees prefer the following leadership stylesNetwork leadership styleprotective(p)Gender EqualityRELATIONSHIP (ANALYSIS OF LINK BETWEEN THEORIES PRACTICE)TheoriesAmericaJapanTheory X__Theory YSince Americans are committed to goals, they exercise high self-control.No threats of punishment are required to ensure task completionPaternalistic Theory Y where there is a mutual, two-way flow of information and influence between boss and subordinates.Seek and accept responsibilities._Theory ZAmericans are motivated by a efficacious commitment to be part of a greater full-l ength in general, and more specifically to their organizationThough individualistic, Americans derive satisfaction date contributing to their companys success.Employees seek out responsibility and strive for opportunities to advance in an organization.Both leaders and subordinates are motivated by a strong sense of commitment to be part of a greater whole (the Japanese organization in which they work).People are -satisfied when they contribute to organizational success through teamwork.In return for the organizations long-term commitment to providing job security (often for life), workers develop strong bonds of loyalty towards their employer.Communication flows between leaders and subordinatesBecause Theory Z is participative, Japanese organizations show continuous interaction and exchange of information and influence between leader and subordinates, as well as among subordinates.The multidirectional flow of communication n the more project-oriented Japanese organizational culture is different from leader and subordinate behaviourTable 2 Showing factors that make up theories Y and Z in America and Japan.PROBLEMS face upThe problems that an American manager will face in Japan will basically be on the issues raised based on the theory Y which are absent in Japan. The table above gives a general overview on some issues that could be conflicting between the two cultures. Some other problems likely to be faced includeCulture ShockConflicts in interest of the manager and the subordinate (Americans seek job satisfaction and individuality while Japanese seek personal goals achievement and collectivism).Frustration on inability to make decisions and having less autonomy.Adaptation to Japanese work/organizational culture.Inability to hire efficient staff and fire non-performing ones.CAUSE and EFFECTS OF THE PROBLEMThe major cause of such problem however is cultural differences amongst this two country as the national cultural has direct impact on citizens and affects their leadership style and every part of their lives. As a result, difference in leadership style will also cause problems. Most important effect will be the impact on performance/productivity. Positive effects will lead to improved performance/productivity and negative effects, vice versa. (McColl-Kennedy and Anderson, 2002).POSSIBLE SOLUTIONSTo solve problems associated with difference in leadership style, the American manager has to be deft to understand the Japanese culture, work culture and be aware of differences that survive between the two cultures before being deployed. The following should also be doneThe manager should look at researches (particularly current ones) done about leadership/leading in JapanLearn leadership styles Japanese employees are used to their preferred leadershipstyle and incorporate both to his/her leadership style as House and Dessler (1974)found that only leadership behaviour seen to bring satisfaction or with futurepotential will be seen as acc eptable to employeesAsk for feedback on his performance/style from employees to where and when tomake changesIncorporate Ouchis theory Z (Integration) designed to make doing calling inJapan easier for Americans (England, 1983).Type Z (integration)Long-run employment trouble rotation in particular areasMajority decisionsResponsibility for group members wax specialists and generalistsSource Adapted from Mohr, 2010CONCLUSIONIn conclusion, leadership styles and theories have been considered both generally and specifically as it pertains to this piece of work, the role of culture in determining leadership style has been considered, problems faced have been noted and possible solutions have been highlighted.In order to cope with the conflicts/problems, solutions highlighted above should be considered. The manager should also develop trust with his subordinates as he/she might unbosom be ineffective if the subordinates do not accept him/her.