Introduction and Problem Identification
Organization is a social phenomenon, where individual actors and organizational group factors outline the set of behaviours and personality traits, which build on the comfort zone and standards of those, within it (Armstrong & Baron, 2002). To understand the relationships between organizational culture and personality traits and cultural influence on individual behaviour it is critical to recognize that the as social element, organization and individuals are mutually affected (Huczynski & Buchanan 2010). That said; the values, principles and procedures within the company are static, influenced by the individual behaviours, while the same individuals change their roles and acts, influenced by the group thinking, culture and other actors. The relationships between leaders and managers and the organizational culture are very dynamic, as their impact on the formation of it is much more significant than the positions without people management responsibility (Northhouse 2013). One of the most challenging tasks for the company is to find a healthy balance between the management and leadership and shape behaviours, adequate and relevant for the strategic development of the firm. Kotter (2001) argues that many companies are “over managed and under led” at the same time. One could argue that the root of this imbalance in people leadership and management capabilities is ineffective leadership and unappropriated set of behaviours acquired and taught on different stages of the leadership pipeline.
The research question of this document is: “In what way different personality traits and behavioural patterns among individuals on different level of the leadership pipeline impact organizational effectiveness?” The objectives of the study are the following:
- Critically analyse each of the stages of the leadership pipeline (“leading self”, “leading others” and “leading the organization”).
- Research the personality traits and behaviour patterns, which can be seen as appropriate for each of the stages.
- Research the gaps between the appropriate and actual personality traits and behaviour patterns in the contemporary organization.
- Recommend the changes in the training and recruitment and selection processes to address the specificity of the behaviours and traits for each leadership level.
The dissertation is aimed to enact the research and findings which will be methodologically and theoretically relevant to the three major audiences: organizational management, academic circles and individuals on the entry stage of their careers, seeking an effective framework for self-discovery and development.
Methodology
The objective of this document is to analyse the existing practices and policies and use various data sources to build on potentially effective framework of training and development design. Secondary research will be focused on the analysis and research of existing studies and theories on leadership and management practices and will aim at building a ground for more focused pragmatic research methods In order to be able to gather the relevant data for the research the author will explore a variety of the academic and business literature on leadership and management and analyse most popular approaches, such as contingency and situational theories (Arthur, Varying, Coe & Hedges 2012). With that in mind, the research is largely qualitative ad descriptive. The data collected through the secondary research will serve two purposes: it will enact the background of the primary research, justifying the scope of the survey and; it will support the findings from the primary research with the relevant theories from existing studies on the subject to come up with recommendations for the APMM Group. This explains the choice of research design, selected for this dissertation and incorporating both, empirical and theoretical methods of data collection. Mixed research method is appropriate for this study as it is the only way to gather relevant and accurate information from both, organizational and individual perspective. While primary research part will focus on the organizational side of the research question, secondary research method will aim at enacting individual perspective from those, who build on the universe of managers and leaders in large multinational corporations.
The dissertation will present an applied research method, focusing on the improvement of existing practices and policies within the organization in Human Resource Management (HRM) field and training and leadership development specifically (Arthur et al. 2012). Primary research method, which will be used in this study, is a survey among current or former employees of the A.P. Moller-Maersk Group Maersk Line Brand. The study will analyse twenty individuals, who previously worked or are currently occupying management positions in the organization. The preliminary assumptions of this study are:
- Appropriate training and development programs in the company can create a right set of personality traits and behavioural attributes among leaders and positively affect organizational effectiveness.
- Failure to recognize the needs and the capability gap creates misalignment of leadership capabilities and leads to organizational ineffectiveness.
Quality control for the primary research methods is based on timeliness of the document, which is limited to the past three decades. The scope of research will be restricted to this period of time due to the quality issues of the information sources. Only credible academic sources and recognized business data reports will be utilized for data collection and analysis. Primary research method used in this study is a survey and, thus, measurement of quality and viability is based on the accuracy of the sample selection, correct identification of the universe and the response rate of 90%.
Literature Review
Leadership pipeline is a term used by many international corporations to describe the process of management and leadership development within the organizational hierarchy. In the majority of cases the stages of the pipeline include four elements: leading self, leading others and leaders and leading organization (Boxhall & Purcell 2011). “Leading others” and “leading organization” are the stages, which are easy to understand and describe. “Leading leaders”, however, requires some specific clarifications. This level of managerial hierarchy involves supervision and management of “leading others”. “Leading self”, on the other hand, does not assume any people management responsibility; it generally recognizes the potential of individuals for future leadership roles and, thus, serves as an entry level to the management hierarchy (Millmore 2007). Some of the examples for the “leading self” stage include graduate recruitment programs, which aim to attract talented individuals to the Leadership and Management Development Programs (LMD).
One of the most complex elements of people management is diversity. In many situations individuals fail to recognize this diversity and, thus, build an effective team. Leadership, however, would not exist without the concept of teams and, thus social context and the contact zones are critical for the development of this discussion. Katzenbach and Smith (1993) define a team as a group of individuals working together. An inherited truth about teams, according to the authors is that teams and performance are “inextricably connected” and, thus, commitment should be in the focus of motivational element of group work. Nemiro (2004) further develops the discussion on teams and communication process in the group environment, outlining three approaches to team building and organization. Wheel approach is the solution, where leadership is permanent, and the concept of a leader is absolute and unquestionable. Modular approach suggests that teams can be led by a group of leaders, which allows matrix approach to work and enables subgroups. From larger organizational perspective this type of teams is seen in classic matrix organizational structure. Finally, iterative approach recognizes the leader as facilitator, where the roles and responsibilities are well defined and split in order to avoid the need for centralized control function. This approach to leadership is often attributed to the organizations with transformational leadership practices (Gill 2011). The theory of leadership approaches goes closely with the concept of charisma and transforming leadership, outlining the principle of staff development and growth as the pillar of organizational sustainability. Charismatic leadership, on the other hand, is a stronger centralizer, an individual whose vision is somewhat unquestionable and, thus, suitable for the wheel approach to the team formation process (Yuki, 2009). The discussion on the leadership and teams is relevant for this study as it gives a background of the working environment in the organization and on different stages of leadership pipeline. As such, junior manager´s responsibilities and team structure may significantly vary from the one of the senior manager, who leads the leaders. With that in mind, understanding of the dynamics of each team building approach is interesting for the evaluation of the traits and behavioural patterns.
The stages of leadership pipeline restrict and limit the choice of the team building approach. As such, “leading self” stage, when an individual primary goal is to discover self and understand tangible and intangible elements of management hierarchy, will unlikely be able to develop and test his own personality traits and behaviours in wheel approach, as it will limit his freedom for error and learning on demand (Nohria, Groysberg & Linda-Eling 2008). “Leading leaders” and “Leading organization” stages, however, do not leave room for facilitation leadership and demand central point of decision making process and visionary leadership, achievable in modular and wheel, as opposed to iterative approach.
The process of leading and team interaction is based on the ability of a leader to control his behaviour and realize the range of personality traits, which drive his decisions and actions. The fact is that each stage of the management hierarchy demands different behaviour, as leading a department is different than running a branch or even the country operations. This requires a certain level of emotional intelligence. Individuals grow within the organization and eventually shift from one to another stage. Given the fact that leaders should be able and aim at expanding their scope of work and take on more responsibilities, the ability to transform and adapt is central for the organization (Boyatzis & McKee 2005). With that in mind, leadership style is not a characteristic of an individual, but his response to the needs of the situation and the team. Individual´s growth along the leadership pipeline will necessitate the change in his style of management and leadership and, consequently, will change behaviour and emphasize different personality traits. Emotional intelligence is the key to succeed in the journey through this pipeline. Emotions by themselves can be seen as a supportive element of human actions and the behaviours, which can be observed in different individuals with leadership responsibilities, are mostly based on their leadership styles, which include visionary, coaching, affiliative, democratic, pacesetting and commanding (Goleman 2005). What differentiates a good leader from a good manager is the ability to adapt various leadership styles, based on the situation and the personalities of those, with whom they are leading. Mayer, Salovey, Caruso (2000) recognize emotional intelligence through a threefold model of mental operation. First element is the emotion itself, which is a form of reaction to change in the interpersonal communication process. Motivation is an internal mechanism to enable simple acts as a survival mechanism. Finally, cognition is the third element, which enables learning from an external environment. Such approach to emotional management outlines the basic principle of interpersonal relationships, which must be understood by the leadership. The reality shows that individual success in a particular role within the organization depends on many factors. The core, however, is the realization that the relationships between the business environment (organization) and its actors (leaders) are mutual and effective leaders are those, who can transform their behaviours and develop. Contingency leadership theory contributes to above discussion. The approach outlines the fact that individuals, which are great at one role may fail in another position, due to the specific personal characteristics, which may or may not find their application in the assigned role (Donaldson 2001).Understanding the above components builds on individuals´ ability to adapt to the situations and ensure that their leadership style is appropriate to the situation and the team.
The concept of leadership is often interchanged with management in the business world, and this constitutes the biggest mistake for the organizational development as these elements are very different and equally essential for the company. Management can be described with the application of the traits theory, which suggest that in all leaders or managers, for this matter, possess a certain set of common traits, which determines their effectiveness. Such traits may include empathy, decision-making skills, assertiveness and other elements and determine our external behaviour. This theory can provide an insight into leadership along with behavioural approach that recognizes several leadership styles, such as laissez-faire, autocratic and democratic. These theories together provide good insight into the scope of transformation, which individual have to go through, once they move along the leadership pipeline (Donaldson 2001). Kotter (1990) outlines the horizontal and vertical differences between management and leadership, highlighting that management is responsible for planning, organizing and controlling, while leadership is built around motivating and inspiring, setting direction and aligning people. The fact is that management and leadership are similar to some extent as both concepts involve dealing and guiding people and taking on decision-making responsibility (Kotter 1990). When it comes to the discussion around the leadership pipeline, it is possible to distinguish management and leadership in geometrical dimension, where management is responsible for horizontal activities, such as dealing with actuals and day-to-day business operations and leadership looks into vertical elements, such as future and planning. To better understand the influence of the level of the leadership pipeline on the behaviour patterns and development of personality traits, one should understand that two levels, “leading self” and “leading others” are majorly focused on horizontal development, while “leading leaders” and “leading organization is majorly the process off vertical learning and development. With that, desired and acquired behavioural patterns and personal attributes differ a lot, based on the level of this hierarchy. To better understand these variations, further insight into management and leadership cognitive and emotional attributes will be required.
Behaviours and personality traits of individuals are built from experience as well as inherited. Learning from experience is an essential part of the human development and situations and social environment explain the differences and authenticity of our behaviour (Honey 2001). Learning on experience is a continuous process within the organization, which builds on the majority of the LMD programs and can explain the differences in behaviours and personality attributes of different level managers. It is evident that the level of leadership to some degree grants individuals with certain common characteristics, building on their style, as expected behaviour, becomes part of their learning process. While traits and behavioural theories can explain the similarities in the behaviours and reactions of the individuals on external environment, they fail to explain the diversity of the leadership, which can be seen in the history and the modern world. Rooke and Tolbert (2001) attempt to close this gap with their framework of seven transformations of leadership. The authors introduce the concept of authenticity of a leader. Authenticity at the same time is one of the traits, which define good managers and great leaders (George 2005). George argues that authentic leadership is the result of self-discovery and personal life story and cannot be created or developed solely in working environment. Nonetheless, an insight into the learning process under the development programs outlines the need for the development of personal signature in leadership, discovering “an ideal self and real self (Boyatzis & McKee 2005). This change should be intentional and based on “experimenting with and practicing new habits. The organizational leadership pipeline should be able to support these processes with the involvement of mentorship and assistance in the development of the unique leadership style, rather than teach a “universal” framework of leadership.
Timeline
Limitations
The viability of the research and the accuracy of analysis can be influenced by several factors:
- Personal experience and set of values of the researcher, which may impact the analysis and interpretation of the primary data;
- Limitation in the analysis of the universe for the survey, as the definition of it may be impacted by personal view of the researcher and informants;
- Potential risks associated with the response rate of the survey sample;
- Delays in project milestones delivery influence by external factors, such as survey results, coordinator´s time availability and other factors.
All the limitations are taken into consideration. Personal factor in the research results and evaluation will be limited by adopting issue-based approach to the research and multifaceted presentation of data. Potential fallacies in the analysis of the survey are related to the interpretation of the size of the universe and the limitations in this situation are relative and will not affect the viability of the research. Finally, the delays risk is already included in the timelines of the project, and it can be compensated in the course of the project.
References
Armstrong M. and Baron A. (2002) Strategic HRM . The Key to Improved Business Performance. London: Chartered Inst. of Personnel and Development. Print.
Arthur J, Varing M Coe R, and Hedges L V (2012). Research Methods and Methodologies in Education. London, UK: Sage Publications.
Bass B (2008). The Bass Handbook of Leadership, Free Press 4th ed ch 22 ‘Transformational leadership’ pp618-648 ISBN 9780743215527
Bennis W and Nanus B (1997). Leaders Harper Business ch 2 'Leading others, managing yourself' pp18-79 ISBN 0887308392
Boxall P. and Purcell J. (2011). Strategy and Human Resource Management. New York: Pelgrave McMillan. Print.
Boyatzis R and McKee A (2005). Resonant Leadership, HBS Press: Boston, ch 5 Intentional Change, pp 87-109
Collins J (2001/2011) ‘Level 5 Leadership’ in HBR’s 10 Must Reads on Leadership, Harvard Business School Publishing, pp115-136, ISBN9781422157978
Donaldson L (2001). The Contingency Theory of Organizations. London, UK: Sage Publications. Print.
George B (2005) 'Leadership is authenticity, not style' in Jossey Bass 2005 Management Skills, Jossey Bass: San Francisco pp 3-20 ISBN 0787973416
Gill R (2011). ‘Leadership Theory: A Critical Review, Synthesis and Redefinition' from Theory and Practice of Leadership, London, UK: Sage Publications.
Goleman G, Boyatzis R and McKee A (2002). The New Leaders, Little Brown ch 4 'The Leadership Repertoire' pp53-69 ISBN 316857661
Honey P (2001) Improve Your People Skills, CIPD: London pp115-118 ‘Learning from experience’
Huczynski A and Buchanan D (2010). Organizational Behaviour. Pearson Education Ch 9 ‘Motivation’ pp 262-292
Katzenbach J and Smith D (1993). The Wisdom of Teams McGraw Hill ch 3 'Team Basics: A working definition and discipline' pp43-64 ISBN 0077094573
Kotter J (1990). A Force for Change The Free Press ch 1 Management and Leadership pp 3-18 ISBN 0029184657
Kotter J (2001). What Leaders Really Do. Harvard Business School, viewed 6 May 2014, http://hbr.org/2001/12/what-leaders-really-do/ar/1
Mayer J D, Salovey P and Caruso D (2000) Models of Emotional Intelligence. in RJ Sternberg Handbook of Intelligence Cambridge University Press: Cambridge 396-420 ISBN 0521596483
Millmore M. (2007). Strategic Human Resource Management. Contemporary Issues. New York: Financial Times Prentice Hall. Print.
Nemiro J. (2004). Creativity in Virtual Teams: Key Components for Success. Chapter 1. Mapping Out the Creative Process and Work Design Approach. John Willey & Sons Publishing. Print.
Nohria N, Groysberg B., and Linda-Eling L. (2008). Employee Motivation. The Powerful New Model. Harvard Business Review. Retrieved 8 February 2014. http://www.stanford.edu/group/designx_lab/wikiupload/b/bb/HBR_Employee_Motivation.pdf
Northouse P (2013). 6th ed of Leadership: Theory and Practice: Sage chapter 4 ‘Style Approach’ pp 75-97
Rooke D. and Tobert W.R. (2005) Seven Transformations of Leadership. Harvard Business Review, April 2005. Retrieved 23 January 2014, http://www.newperspectives.com.au/downloads/seven%20transformations%20of%20leadership.pdf
Yuki G A (2009). Leadership in Organizations. Pearson Education ch 9 ‘Charismatic and transformational leadership’ pp262-295 ISBN 9780138157142
