Introduction
Organizational environment is a topic worth discussing yet people have always found a reason to go around it. Its effects are quite visible and integral to any organization’s success. This environment under the limelight refers to the factors outside and within the organization, which has a direct effect on the operations of the company. Alterations of these factors affect the organization performance directly either positively or negatively. The environment are of two types; the internal and external environment. The internal factors includes all the factors that affect the company, but are within the control of the organization whereas the external constitutes those factors that affect the organization, but are out of control of the organization. The internal factors include culture, incentives, etc. while the external include factors like government interference, legislation, economy and so on. Our concern this time is the organizational culture and how it impacts leadership of the organization (Prenestini & Lega, 2013).
Discussion
Management culture is the one factor, internal in nature, but falling under a broader blanket which is cultural factors. This division of culture consists of management practices that associated with an organization. Such practices include how the management averts a situation, incentives used by the directorate, etc. They look at what the management does on an everyday basis, how they behave, the way they dress, etc. This is a very significant aspect of culture as this is where the attention is most. Most, if not all, employees usually have the managers as their role models. How the management dress will have an impact on the company, how they behave will also matter. It is essential, therefore, to have the management of the business being on their best behavior because it is a position watched by everyone. (Kirkley et al., 2011).
Leadership refers, on the other hand, to the process of social influence where someone can coax support from other persons to facilitate accomplishments of certain shared goals. It goes hand in hand with management with a thin line separating the two, but their roots hail from the same hole. One could even term their relationship symbiotic because sometimes they are complementary. Therefore, a manager with excellent leadership qualities has a better output than one with no leadership qualities. Their difference is mostly that leaders gain their power of control by eliciting support whereas managers get to exercise their control because it is the authority given to them. A manager, therefore, who does not have the support from his junior staff is not an appropriate one for the position. Leadership is also important in the management because it determines the amount of power a manager gets. Power obtained from the support of the staff is important and means that the manager will have enough control of his department (Laschinger et al., 2014).
How management culture affects leadership capabilities is one aspect that can almost elude the eye. But keener scientists are never disappointing as there are theories, several in number, that try to explain how their link emanates. Among the theories is the Implicit Leadership theory. It postulates that each has his or her own set of beliefs, assumptions, and convictions (implicit theories) which act like distinguishes of leaders from others. They could be about traits that also distinguish effective leaders from ineffective ones and evil leaders from among the moral ones. This theory then influences the values that these individuals place on the leader in question. If the manager accepts the set behaviors by trying to meet the standards then his capabilities as a leader ae also affected by the change. The leader’s attitude will change and so will his view on matters, and this will mean a new leadership style.
Assumptions of this theory include qualities of leadership are attributed to individuals for these persons to be leaders based on the degree with which they fit or the congruence between the implicit leadership theory and the leadership behaviors they enact. Another is that this theory provides constraint, guide and moderation to the leadership exercise, the perception of leaders as ones with influence, leader’s acceptance, effective, acceptable and the degree with which the leaders get granted privileges and status. Value Belief Theory is another theory by Hoftstede and Triandis in 1980 and 1995 respectively. They assert that beliefs and values that members of a particular management culture will affect the extent to which individual, group and institution behaviors are enacted. Also, their degree of acceptability, legitimacy, and efficiency face influence. The version that Hostfede put forth is one that contains four dimensions; individualism versus collectivism, masculinity versus femininity, power equalization versus Stratification (power distance) and tolerance versus intolerance of uncertainty. All these aspects will affect the decision-making stamina and ferocity that managers have. This will also affect the leadership capability of the very individual because their views of a lot of things are under transformation.
Another theory worth considering is the Implicit Motivation theory. Its advancers are Lowell, Atkinson, McClell and Clark in the year 1953 and involved motives that are non-conscious. This theory states that it is the fundamental nature of motivation of humans can be well understood if put in terms of three non-conscious (implicit) motives, namely; social influence (power), achievement and affiliation. The central position of the Implicit Motivation Theory is that a demand set of orders imposed on firms that should be carried out if survival and improvement of the organization is to be guaranteed. These demands are identifiable as organizational contingencies (Vandenberg, 2010).
A final theory is the Integrated Theory which entails the entities and attributes that distinguishes any culture from any other culture is the predictive aspect of organizational practices and leadership behaviors which are most frequently enacted, efficient and acceptable in that particular culture. This theory suggests that societal, cultural practices and values affect what leaders do and how they do it. The managers of an organization are usually immersed in their culture and the behavior patterns that they enact are the global behavior patterns which are preferable in that culture. The managers then influence the next level of management and subsequent leaders in the organization by criteria such as selective management, socialization, and role modeling. This theory also asserts that as much as management culture affects leadership; leadership impacts on culture and practices are also evident (Vandenberg, 2010).
Effects of culture on leadership are several. However, they fall in two aspects, negative and positive. The positive aspects are those that will enhance the output of the manager. The manager will be better performing and improve his stamina of decision making. The negative ones are the opposite of the positive ones. They have a dramatic and fast effect on a culture that is positive. An instance that may relate to this is that of WorldCom. It was once a leading company in telecommunication and one of the most innovative cultures. But this was only until Bernie Ebbers took control. He squeezed every possible cent he could get his hands on from the environment at the same time pressuring the employees to work harder yet providing less.
Among the impacts, management culture is that when culture is a function of leadership. Companies, it is believed, are the embodiment of the leaders who operate them. Therefore, a leader whose company is one in bad culture then is a victim of bad leadership that has been compromised by the poor culture. Thus, the ethics of a leader are in control of this situation. If the leader is one of no values, but full of vices, the company ethics could be the culprit that has caused that. A good instance is a business getting a new executive director of the department. The management culture of the organization will be among the first thing he or she will be accustomed to and will in time alter his values and beliefs, and even the leadership capabilities will not be the same again (Alharthey et al., 2013).
Management culture will also change the way a manager works out his schedule. Where the schedule is filled with constructive duties that are beneficial to himself and the company, the manager becomes someone of value to the organization. He builds on his career, but that is not all. The manager simultaneously improves on his leadership skills and qualities because of probably the trust and belief he receives from the employees. Naturally, with all these positivism, the ultimate prize is the increased productivity and profit margins. A management culture that tolerates laziness and non-productivity will result in a manager with a negative attitude and character that does not encourage any development. Such a culture is a showing sign of entropy looming over the organization’s future (Alharthey et al., 2013).
Job satisfaction is also an element of management culture. A culture encouraging inadequate pay will give rise to managers and leaders who do not care what happens to the company. They become a liability, and their loyalty is shaken which results in their productivity taking a dive. A culture that is solid behind the idea of paying everyone sufficient and equivalent to wok done will give the employees a sense of job satisfaction. Contentment will increase loyalty and appreciation of the person. These two factors will contribute greatly to boost productivity levels. Any positive culture should always enforce adequate pay to all employees if it is to inspire better leadership qualities into their leaders. A good leader will remain a good leader if he can know and appreciate his position in the culture. The link between culture and leadership is there, and a positive management culture should be a priority for success to be realized (Alharthey et al., 2013).
Management culture will affect how a manager relates with his employees. A management culture that encourages discrimination will make a manager look down upon his workers. He will neglect them not giving them the appreciation and encouragement they need as motivation. Mistreatment and favoring will be evident in such cultures. This is where the manager starts losing his support from the workers, and this is where his leadership capabilities go down. Where his support goes under, so does his control and power within the organization. Thus, such a manager will not be a useful component in the organization anymore. Where equality is promoted, and respect is a vital thing, support of a manager doubles and so does his control. Respect is well accorded and whatever he says is adhered to (Alharthey et al., 2013).
Conclusion
The above findings clearly accentuate the fact that management culture indeed has deep roots within the leadership capabilities of a manager. It is also clear that these effects it has on the leadership skills are either positive or negative. The positive impacts of management culture such as satisfaction, elation with the employees, being a function of leadership and improved schedule management have shown that if much input is added to them, the results will be significant. The output in terms of leadership is improved. The efficiency of the manager increases considerably, and the tenacity of dealing with situations and crisis also develops. Thus, this proves beyond shadow of doubt that indeed management culture is a determinant of the fact that leadership capabilities can be leveraged to their fullest of potential. However, it will be foolish to ignore the implications of the negative impacts of management culture on leadership. The clear result of this is toxic leadership that refers to the application of inappropriate leadership qualities and skills at the right time. Toxic leadership will make the leaders exhibit “dark” behaviors such as aggressiveness, bullying, arrogance, etc. which are unwanted qualities of a good leader.
.
Reference List
Kirkley, C, Bamford, C, Poole, M, Arksey, H, Hughes, J, & Bond, J 2011, 'The impact of organizational culture on the delivery of person-centered care in services providing respite care and short breaks for people with dementia', Health & Social Care In The Community, 19, 4, pp. 438-448, Academic Search Premier, EBSCOhost, viewed 10 December 2014
Laschinger, H, Wong, C, Cummings, G, & Grau, A 2014, 'Resonant Leadership and Workplace Empowerment: The Value of Positive Organizational Cultures in Reducing Workplace Incivility', Nursing Economic$, 32, 1, pp. 5-44, Academic Search Premier, EBSCOhost, viewed 10 December 2014
Vandenberg, HR 2010, 'Culture theorizing past and present: trends and challenges', Nursing Philosophy, 11, 4, pp. 238-249, Academic Search Premier, EBSCOhost, viewed 10 December 2014
Prenestini, A, & Lega, F 2013, 'Do Senior Management Cultures Affect Performance? Evidence from Italian Public Healthcare Organizations', Journal of Healthcare Management, 58, 5, pp. 336-351, Academic Search Premier, EBSCOhost, viewed 10 December 2014.
Alharthey, B, Rasli, A, Yusoff, R, & Al-Ghazali, B 2013, 'IMPACT OF INNOVATION CULTURE ON HUMAN RESOURCES MANAGEMENT PRACTICES', International Journal Of Academic Research, 5, 3, pp. 60-63, Academic Search Premier, EBSCOhost, viewed 10 December 2014.
