Leadership can be perceived as the process through which an individual influences the fashion in which a group of persons is carrying out a specific task. The individual who is central to this process is known as a leader. There is a broad range of traits which a leader should bear for him or her to be effective in leadership. For the purposes of this paper, this discussion shall majorly concentrate on the trait of charisma as a leadership strategy (Elearn, 2007). All leaders ought to be charismatic, as it is a great feature in progressive leaders. This is because it is one of the most effective trait with respect to leadership. Although Charisma does not entirely work in isolation, it largely influences the proficiency of a leader. A charismatic leader plays an imperative role in enhancing the effectiveness of the followers.
Charisma provides leaders with the opportunity of attaining a relatively high degree of trust from their teams. This is an attribute that brings about positive implications with regard to the effectiveness of a leader. Through the application of charisma, a leader is in a comparatively fair position of facilitating his or her team to realize its vision (Hill & Jones, 2013). This trait renders a leader to be extremely outstanding from numerous perceptive. For instance, the prevalence of charisma facilitates a leader to foster team effort. This is largely because it is exceedingly likely that the majority of the team members will like their leader. As a result, they will strive to ensure that they have conducted and behaved in a way that will impress their respective leader. Therefore, it becomes an easy task for the leader to provide directions in regard to different operations of the organization under his/her jurisdiction.
In addition, the nature of the approach which a leader applies when leading his or her team will have direct implications for the effectiveness of his leadership. All leaders should boast of excellent decision making skills. This is majorly because the nature of decisions which a leader makes will influence his or her proficiency. A leader should be capable of establishing the most suitable style of leadership that should be employed in any given situation (Cole, 2009). This implies that there is no single style of leadership is effective in isolation. Instead, a leader needs to strike a perfect blend between the various styles of leadership so as to facilitate the realization of the desired outcome. Democracy is a leadership technique that leaders should be conversant. There are numerous occurrences that necessitate the application of democratic principles, and there is a fair share of instances that precludes the application of the other styles of leadership. Leaders need to consider the shortcomings of the various techniques of leadership for them to exude a comparatively high degree of proficiency with regard to their application. For instance, leaders who are seeking to apply democracy need to be informed that it can be particularly time consuming, thus it should not be applied in most of the emergency situations. In some cases, leaders need to employ authoritative characteristics where the tasks involved are direct without the requirement of much consultation.
Autocracy is a leadership technique that can serve as an extraordinary tool in contemporary leadership. Autocracy is best applied in situations whereby democracy has failed or in occurrences whereby the unpopular decision is the most suitable remedy. Due to this, leaders should be competent in establishing situations which demand the application of autocracy. Leaders should also be informed of the numerous shortcomings of this technique of leadership. For instance, leaders should be aware that the application of the principles of autocracy is likely to brew a lot of resentment and resistance (French, 2011). The transactional technique of leadership is also a key contributor to the effectiveness of the leader. Through the application of this nature of leadership, the leader facilitates the realization of the desired outcomes by making certain that the entire team remains high motivated at all times. The key advantage of this technique of leadership is that it makes it difficult to ascertain the factors that motivate the members of a team. The ability of maintaining a motivated team plays an imperative role in enhancing the productivity of the employees, through improved productivity.
Over and above that, all leaders should always formulate a contingency plan. This is because most of the plans are usually formulated on the basis of certain conditions. This implies that if the projected conditions do not prevail, the plan being implemented is likely not to yield the desired outcomes. As a result, it is quintessential for leaders to ensure that they have always formulated a contingency plan (Morgan, 2006). This is majorly because the application of a contingency plan may facilitate the mitigation of the various negative effects that are attributable to the variation in the prevailing determinants. Therefore, contingency plans are essential in any organization, just in case the initial plan fails. The leader will have played a central role in ensuring the fruition of the desired outcomes. Leaders should make sure that all they have formulated and instituted a variety of checks and balances. These checks and balances will serve as the basis of determining the nature of contingency plans that need to be implemented in any given occurrence.
Evaluation of Charles Taylor’s Leadership
Charles Taylor can be perceived to be an effective leader on account of numerous attributes. Charles Taylor can be considered as a charismatic leader. This is majorly because the majority of his decisions founded on information that is factual. The majority of the employees tend to embrace this form of leadership (Northouse, 2013). Unlike Li, Charles Taylor appreciates the institution that he serves under. This means that Charles appreciates that he is just an individual who has been chosen to carry out the duties of a specific office within the organization. He acknowledges the essence of his office, and he is aware that it is greater than him. On the other hand, Li has personified the office that he holds. As a result, he does not handle any form of criticism is a fashion that is positive. His character indicates that he is not informed of the distinction between himself and the office that he occupies.
Charles Taylor appreciates the diversity in leadership techniques. He has managed to tailor his leadership in a fashion that exhibits his percipience of the various techniques of leadership. For instance, Charles applies some degree of autocracy when he discontinued Li’s project (Elearn, 2007). This is a decision that he made without consulting Li irrespective of knowing that the decisions will have direct implications for him as well as his work. In another scenario, Charles is seen to be employing democracy. Case in point is the incident whereby Charles sought to discontinue the role that Li was playing on the basis of the sentiments of the other employees with regard to his performance. The majority of the employees opine that Li is extremely assertive, and his is a technique that is counterproductive. The primary shortcoming of Charles Taylor’s technique of leadership is the fashion in which he introduces change.
Informed by your leadership philosophy, if you had to coach Charles Tang to become a more effective leader, what would you do?
I would concentrate primarily on training him on how to introduce changes within an organization. The basic unit of any organization is comprised of human beings. Human beings are known to be naturally resistant to change. As a result, I would seek to equip Charles Taylor with skills that are geared towards enhancing his proficiency with regard to instituting changes or transformations within an organization. This is because all leaders need to be proficient at introducing changes, regardless of the technique of leadership that they apply (Yukl, 2013). Charles Taylor should formulate proper strategic plans whenever he is about to introduce changes. As part of his plan, he should make certain that all employees are conversant about the nature of changes that he seeking to implement. He should educate the employees on the cons and pros of these changes so as to quell any form of resistance or resentment that is likely to happen because of the proposed transformations (Schein, 2010). I would train Charles Taylor on the ways through which he can formulate suitable contingency plans. This is largely because they are particularly imperative when it comes to responding to any form of variation of determinants.
Reference List
Cole, K. (2009). Management: Theory and Practice. Sidney: Pearson Education Australia.
Elearn. (2007). Leadership and Management in Organisations. London: Elsevier.
French, R. (2011). Organizational Behaviour. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
Hill, C., & Jones, G. (2013). Strategic Management: Theory: An Integrated Approach. New York: Cengage Learning.
Morgan, G. (2006). Images of Organization. London: Sage.
Northouse, P. G. (2013). Leadership: theory and practice. London: Sage.
Rost, J. C. (1993). Leadership for the Twenty-first Century. New York: Greenwood.
Sadler, P. (2009). Leadership. New York: Kogan Page.
Schein, E. H. (2010). Organizational Culture and Leadership. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
Yukl. (2013). Leadership in organizations. London: Pearson.
