Enron was a U.S based corporation operating in the energy industry. On top of that, it was also involved in the commodities and services business. It was one of the world’s largest companies in the energy sector, with a workforce of up to 20,000 workers. It also ranked the most innovative company in the U.S. The company gained recognition from the Fortune magazine for six consecutive years as the most innovative company in America. This continued until it was discovered that the company engaged in high level accounting fraud. By the end of 2001, the world had discovered that the company used creative accounting to report high profits. This led to its bankruptcy and subsequent collapse in December 2001.
In such cases, leaders come up with a vision which they share with their followers. Given their ability to convince them, they make them to bear the same vision in their hearts. They paint a picture of success for the whole organization and the individuals if the vision is achieved. On their side, the followers usually don’t question the leaders’ actions, or words. The resultant relationship is more of a cult, where the followers follow their leaders dogmatically (Dubrin, 2010). In the case of Enron, the CEO, Jeffrey Skilling, was such a man. He was full of self-promotion and always winning people to his side.
The main disadvantage with this kind of leadership is that the leaders may implement policies that are not favorable. They usually blind other people towards furthering ideas that only benefit the leaders only. Like in the case of Enron, the policies implemented served to promote the social ranking of the leaders. This led to the ultimate collapse of the company.
Another aspect of Enron’s leadership was the postmodernism leadership. In this type of leadership, the leader takes the place of a star. The others just take the place of mere players in the game. This gives the leader the ultimate authority over all people and resources. The leadership is in most cases at the mercy of a few men. In the case of Enron, only a few executives were at the helm of the corporation. They decided what to be done, and the others had just to follow. The leaders created a certain kind of philosophy that was to be accepted by everyone in the organization. This philosophy was also sold to the public. This philosophy was to the effect that the company was the best energy corporation.
This type of leadership makes the leaders to become autocratic in nature. Others in the organization become mere objects of implementing the leaders’ decisions and orders. No consultations are done, as the leaders perceive themselves to be know-all individuals. In this case, even the best input from the members is not considered and this may hamper growth. Workers get demoralized by the constant frustration by their bosses, resulting to reduced productivity.
References
DuBrin, A. J. (2010). Leadership: Research Findings, Practice and Skills. (6th ed). Mason,
Ohio: South Western Publishing Co.
