The current paper is committed to the analysis of Ricardo Semler’s leadership style. When conducting this analysis, a conclusive illustration of management style of Ricardo Semler is made. Also, the paper is devoted to highlighting the advantages and drawback of his style of management. To assists in highlighting these advantages and drawbacks, the analysis focuses on employee recruitment as well as on control and incentives. The current presentation is also committed to analyzing the challenges that a radically ‘hands-off’ leader may face and how to effectively address those potential challenges.
Ricardo Semler’s leadership style can be described using a leadership model. His leadership style is best described by participative leadership model. In the author’s own words, Semler is the 'leading proponent and most tireless evangelist' of participative management. He gives little emphasis to traditional features of managing cooperation. This is signified by him avoiding policy manuals, written rules, organizational charts and dress codes. Being a participative leader, he involves employees in the whole process. His empowerment of workers to make managerial decisions is evident. He is a kind of leader who mandates the employees to express their views on the strategic plans as well as leadership positions of the company. This is advantageous in the sense that when employees take part in decision making, there is greater social commitment to each other and this ultimately enhances their dedication to that decision (Kippenberger, 2002).
Sempler’s style of leadership signifies how the business is able to perform better than competitors by avoiding traditional methods of control and incentives. Semler simply trusts in the ingenuity and creativity of his workforce. His participative leadership style ensures that the employees’ creative value is harnessed resulting in greater flexibility and productivity for both himself as the manager and the employees. Consequently, this leadership style is a plus as employees are lesser competitive but are more collaborative since they work on joint goals. Besides, since they are involved in the decision making, employees are majorly committed to actions which lead to higher productivity (Kippenberger, 2002).
His leadership style as well can be described as a mission to completely change habitual thoughts that basically give rise to rigidity at the workplace as well as dehumanizing workplaces to a productive workplace where workforce is regarded as human beings who are able to reason and make performing decisions in a manner of mutual commitment (Kippenberger, 2002).
In addition, Semler’s presentation is perceived as provocative, based on personal experience as chief executive officer besides being insightful. His leadership style is a dominant catalyst for workforce and other leaders to discover creative solutions and fresh alternatives to problems of modern management.
Nevertheless, one potential drawback of Sempler’s leadership style is time factor. His style seems to allow more time before taking actions. There is a lot of time taken to get every employees opinion which would otherwise be used in a productive work. Also, this leadership style may be problematic in the recruitment of personnel fit and good for his organizational culture. It may also be cumbersome to provide training and development to employees in his work setting since all employees view themselves as equal and with same capabilities that need not be directed (Goleman, Boyatzis, and McKee, 2002).
The challenges that a radically ‘hands-off’ leader may face are many. A manager using a radically hands-off leadership style often face challenges and opportunities as well for his managerial success. This style of leadership places higher level of trust in employees’ ability as well as their dedication to accomplishment of the company’s set goals. However, to attain these goals, the only effort needed is employees’ willingness to go perform extra mile and to demonstrate higher degree of devotion to the accomplishment of the leader’s vision and mission for the organization. Therefore, a shift in employees’ willingness plunges the organization into darkness (Basu, 2012).
Radically hands-off leadership is also a challenge in the sense there is likelihood that it usually leads to organizational drift. Organizational drift simply results from the loss of focus by departments due to lack of sound guidance from the senior management. Lack of communication of priorities consistently and clearly ultimately results in an organizational drift (Basu, 2012).
There is as well a challenge of fuzzy accountability. There is usually confusion of definitely who is responsible or is in charge. Organizational problems that affect performance may thus remain unsolved as none is ready to take ownership. Similarly, Simler, in this case, may only come to know of a potentially damaging problem too late that it may be impossible to salvage (Basu, 2012)
Decision making is greatly slowed down in hands-off leadership style. Usually, senior management’s failure to give comprehensible direction to middle level managers is problematic as tough decisions may not be made and thus make the organization lose revenue as well as market share. To solve this problem, a leader should be able set deadlines on major decisions and instill accountability (Basu, 2012).
These challenges can thus be mitigated constantly supporting employee training and development. This would equip them with the skills needed leadership and empowerment roles. As well, the leader should be willing to constantly giving performing employees credit to enhance their willingness and actions. In addition, a hand-off leader should train and recruit for diversity (Goleman, et. al. 2002). Training should thus constitute emphasis on contingency and situational models. Managers must thus seek workforce that have strength lacking in the organization (Basu, 2012).
In conclusion, it is clear that the benefits of equipping and empowering employees to undertake vital managerial contributions are vast. By observing Semler’s participative leadership style, the value of creating trust between management and employees is evident and ultimately enhances organization’s performance.
GOLEMAN , D., BOYATZIS, R. E. and McKEE, A. 2004. Primal Leadership: Learning to Lead with Emotional Intelligence. Harvard Business Review Press.
KIPPENBERGER , T. 2002. Leadership Styles. 1st edition. Capstone.
The given case study.
