IMPACT OF LEADERSHIP TECHNIQUES ON EMPLOYEE’S JOB PERFORMANCE
Need help with a related project topic or New topic? Send Us Your Topic
DOWNLOAD THE COMPLETE PROJECT MATERIAL
IMPACT OF LEADERSHIP TECHNIQUES ON EMPLOYEE’S JOB PERFORMANCE
Chapter one
Introduction and Background of the Study
Organisational leadership is a dynamic social process that transcends generations, with equal emphasis on commercial and non-profit organisations.
Today’s organisations are in critical need of powerful leadership that will provide a beneficial and significant platform for employees to thrive legitimately in order to achieve the stated goals and objectives. Almost no organisation or group in the world operates without leadership.
The essence of leadership in an organisation is to provide direction with an inspiration to ensure prudent utilisation of organisational resources in an effective and efficient manner to facilitate the immediate attainment of organisational set goals and objectives by influencing the behaviour of individual members or groups (human component of resources) of the organisation through a non-coercive means with confidence and encouragement towards an improvement in performance without Gryphon (1999) argued that managers, administrators, and their organisations have a tremendous influence on our current society.
Granted, leadership is associated with a group of individuals or an organisation. That is, leadership developed from groups and organisations, implying that a leader cannot exist or function without people (groups or organisations).
Of course, this assumes that any group or organisation that wants to be successful requires both administration and leadership. While the latter is required to effect change
the former improves the accomplishment of orderly results and works in tandem with the latter to promote orderly change; and leadership, in collaboration with management, can maintain the organisation correctly aligned with its environment.
In an organisation, the concept of power and authority is associated with the leadership who exercises it. Organisation is both a bundle of anarchy without leadership and a void without people (workers) and where they are dehumanised through the application of these concepts (power and authority)
resulting from leadership techniques that promote resentment, insubordination, and little or no adherence to instruction from superior to subordinate officer.
Currently, there is a growing awareness in the workplace that managers or administrators can no longer rely solely on their position in the hierarchical structure to exercise the functions of leadership; however, for the desired results to be obtained, managers/administrators must also have a deep feeling and regard for workers to encourage or inspire high morale, a spirit of involvement, cooperation, and willingness to work.
Public sector organisations are frequently confronted with problems caused by leadership techniques and their deteriorating effect on workers, as evidenced by low or no participation in decision making, policy formulation, and implementation, combined with a lack of sensitivity or irregular or irregular training, resulting in low or no adherence to directives and decisions passed from the top to the bottom of the organization’s hierarchy.
In a summary, there are various leadership strategies that management may use to demotivate employees, causing them to withhold contributions, which can have untold implications or effects on productivity.
Studies have demonstrated that adopting authoritarian leadership techniques in organisations results in occasional setbacks and low levels of achievement, because humans are logical thinking animals that require some level of independence.
Scholars recognised the Laizzez faire leadership method as characterised by hesitation, vacillation, and apathy. The leaders have no policies and give the group and its individual members unlimited freedom to do anything they choose.
According to studies, authoritarianism reduces worker happiness and productivity, whereas laissez faire is surrounded by confusion, a sense of no direction, the lowest output or none at all, and workers’ wills (Henry, 1974: 251).
However, it is highlighted that a democratic organisation strengthens followers’ feelings of personal dignity and self-respect. This technique is thought to allow for self-expression, initiative, creativity, group cohesiveness, and innovation
as well as an emphasis on nomothetic and idiographic dimensions of the organisation, resulting in a more people-oriented, participative, and less directive organisation, leading to improved performance and goal realisation.
However, under a situational approach to leadership, the leader’s primary responsibility is to research the features of the organisation (people, tasks, and environment) and then choose the sort of leadership style to use that is regarded appropriate for the organization’s goal achievement.
In other words, the scenario found dictated the type of leadership style to be used. The leader is seen approaching an organisation with zest and an open mind, eager to contribute his full potential without reservation.
However, his viewpoint is determined by internal organisational factors that determine whether he is an authoritarian, laissez faire, or democratic leader.
Based on the foregoing, the researcher intended that this work would reveal and offer leadership techniques that appear appropriate in most circumstances, because an acceptable leadership method can promote organisational progress. The study also aims to describe and assess its impact on personnel and their performance in the organisation.
Theoretical foundation
There is no leadership without followership (subordinateship). An organisation without leadership is analogous to a sailing ship without a compass or, more simply, a flock without a shepherd. Without exaggeration, the Bible is an excellent book on leadership and leadership, among other texts and literatures.
This is seen in the constitution of leadership and governance, which states that because leadership is founded by God, humans must submit to authority. Leadership implies authority (Paul, Romans 13:1).
When the Israelites were defeated in warfare by their adversaries, they demanded a commander (king) who could lead them to the battlefield, which God granted.
When they (the Israelites) were oppressed by the Egyptians, God produced a leader (Moses) to save them. And once Moses left, another leader (Joshua) was ordained and commissioned to continue.
In the event that one leader falls or is dethroned, another is raised or enthroned, as was the case with King Saul and David, respectively, leaving no vacuum. Jesus Christ, too, was a renounced world religious leader during his time.
Babylon was taken and ravaged by Persian King Cyrus in 539 BCE. Simply said, leader(s) produce leader(s). Pharaoh, Joseph, Deborah, and Gideon were also leaders in varied roles and situations, among others.
Following the preceding evolution, leadership, at whatever level, has received God’s sanction and is critical to the survival of every human organised system such as family, church, state, institution, and so on.
Obviously, God-Himself normally communicates with the people through their leaders (Kings, Prophets, Priests, Seers, Commanders), and He also uses them to vindicate His subjects in adversity.
Furthermore, the secular world continues to see a strong leadership tendency that affects all aspects of life. Adolf Hitler and Goebels, German Fuhrers, were Nazi commanders who invaded Europe in an attempt to become a world power.
This resulted in both victories and defeats for them, further embittering Germans with harsh economic and political terms set by the victors, resulting in 1,700% inflation and economic devastation in Germany during the 1920s, leading to World War II (Rourke T. et al. 2003).
Furthermore, in response to the September 11, 2000 attack on Americans, Americans led by President George W. Bush initiated a series of attacks on suspected terrorist states and their perpetrators.
Failures and mishaps that occur in people (follower/subordinate) are frequently blamed and accounted for by leaders, and in many cases, they are held responsible and accountable.
Some organisations are where they are now in terms of success and failure due to hand-off and hand-on leadership styles (Koontz, 2005:255).
Need help with a related project topic or New topic? Send Us Your Topic