Introduction:
The situation for the company at the moment is particularly dire. As the company lost revenue and productivity, it has to undertake downsizing which mean cutting both production capacity as well as the size of the workforce. Downsizing is always painful as well as chaotic to the internal environment of a company because a large number of workers are laid off and some departments are shut down. It has the possibility of impacting morale and motivation among the remaining employees . At this juncture, a smart and motivating leadership is particularly useful from the mid-level managers and supervisors so as to maintain morale at the frontline units and prevent negative outcomes. In this situation, a new manager and a new supervisor need to harmonize their leadership style, which is analyzed below.
The new manager seems to be focused on what his job mainly entails – boosting the figures. A manager is by definition a behind-the-scenes actor and it is he who is ultimately responsible for the vital indicators of the company. Thus, he would have to work a lot with higher officials and with the marketing and sales departments . A lot of this work is desk-based and meeting-based, and he would not be able to spare too much time and effort on the frontlines. However, he communicates his orders and instructions to the frontline, mainly through the supervisor or through written notices, and this creates a sort of delink or disconnect between the ordinary workers and the manager .
The manager needs to convince the workers of the need to work harder for the same salary, and also to convince the workers that their interests and intimately connected to the well-being of the company. Thus, the manager needs to increase his interactions and visits to frontline workers so as to lead from the front, both literally and figuratively. The supervisor too needs to improve his leadership style as it is now set at an ‘eager to please’ mode. While this style can be favorable for higher officials and bosses it does not always inspire the confidence and respect of subordinates. The supervisor would have to approach the ordinary workers and his subordinates in an empathic manner and convince them to see the aims and goals of the management in a favorable manner .
Bad Leadership, its effects, and favorable leadership styles:
Bad leadership involves any aspect of the personality or approach to work from the leaders that fails to get the maximum output from employees. The aim of a manager should be to motivate the employees enough so that they give their maximum effort for their tasks. The leader aims to deploy his employees to achieve certain strategic objectives – when the objectives themselves are not clearly defined or explained to the subordinate workers, they often fail to identify with the goals. As a result, the aims remain unfulfilled. Another bad leadership style is not leading by example. A company that is going though austerity, pay cuts and downsizing would normally expect the employees to put up with a lot of pain. Thus, unless managers and leaders themselves apply the austerity measures as well as hard work and punctuality to them, they won’t be leading by example and would cause disenchantment and antagonize the workers .
This is also called ‘demonstrative leadership’ and is one of the good leadership styles. It is especially applicable in the current situation of the company. Demonstrative leadership would involve the leader, whether that is the manager or the supervisor, defining the broad strategic goals and objectives to the employees, such as the production aims and quotas. Then, there would be attempts to make the employees identify with this aim. Then the leaders will demonstrate the correct attitude and ethic towards work themselves by their own conduct .
References
Fargus, P. (2007). Measuring and Improving Employee Motivation. London: Prentice Hall.
Minja, D., & Barine, K. (2012). Transformational Corporate Leadership. London: Andrews UK Publications.
Sims, R., & Quattro, S. (2015). Leadership: Succeeding in the Private, Public, and Not-for-profit Sectors. Abingdon: Routledge.
Thomas, K. (2010). Intrinsic Motivation at Work: What Really Drives Employee Engagement. New York: Read How You Want Inc.
