Review Of Research Evidence On Antecedents â€Myassignmenthelp.Com

Question: Discuss About The Review Of Research Evidence On Antecedents? Answer: Introducation Kurt Lewins: Lewin was born in 1890 in Germany but later became an American citizen after emigrating in 1933. He was critical in the development of psychology as the foundation that answers many of the social problems based on theory that is verifiable empirically (Daniels, 2017). He published many academic books and articles and postulated several leadership theories. His theory on leadership is participative in nature. Leadership Model: Three styles of leading were posited by Lewin in 1939. These are the Autocratic, Democratic and Laissez-Faire models. The Autocratic style states that the leaders make decisions without the consultation of other people. The Democratic model involves the input of other people in the process of making decisions in leadership. The Laissez-Faire is where the leader has minimal involvement in marketing decisions, yet retains the final responsibility for the actions taken. Robert House: House received his PhD in 1960 from Ohio State. He was involved in studies on management with a special focus on personality traits of leaders. His studies also made scientific connections between personality, power and leadership in organizations (Leadership Legacy Program, 2017). He authored more than 130 publications and is best known for the Path-Goal Theory. He passed away in 2011. Leadership Theory: The Path-Goal theory states that leaders support and encourage their followers to the set organizational goals by clearly articulating the path they should follow. Four styles of leading are associated with his model: directive, supportive, achievement-oriented and participative. Bernard Bass: Bass (1925-2007) was a scholar who was instrumental in the development of Organizational and Industrial Psychology. He authored more than 400 academic articles that focused on leadership. He is credited with refining and developing the ideas of James Burn on transformational leadership into a viable theory. Leadership Theory: The transformational leadership theory states that leaders affect their followers by transforming them into behaviors that are ideal through motivation. His theory rests on four pillars: motivation, intellectual stimuli, consideration on the individual and influence which is idealized (Sun Chen Zhang, 2017). The moral character of the leader is also emphasized in this model of leading. Question two- The context of Lewins theory with regard to leaders is whether to be actively involved in leading or being hands off in their approach (Billig, 2015). The degree of participation in leading comes across as the key challenge within the context of this model. The challenge is whether to take the central position and make all the decisions or allow for participation by other people. The challenge of leaders in relation to the Path-Goal theory is leading where there is no clear organizational road map to lead the employees towards goals. This is the challenge in organizations going through crisis, change or take-over. The leader then takes it upon them to set goals and chart the path for the employees. The challenge faced by leaders within the context of the transformational model is where the leader works in an environment with poor motivation, high turn-over and low productivity with no role models. This model sets to establish the leader as the role model in providing leadership that is transformational. Question three- Lewins Theory strengths and weaknesses: The major strength of Lewins theory is that it allows for participation in the democratic and Laissez models. Greater participation allows for broader inclusion of diverse perspectives which is beneficial (Billig, 2015). Weakness: The major weakness is that there is lack of owning up to responsibility in the laissez-faire style while leaders are hidden in the economics model postulated by Lewin. House Path-Goal theory: The strength of this theory is that it is the best approach in situations where there are time constraints. It leads to quick turnaround in emergency situations in organizations. Weakness: If the leader who is charting the path has flaws, the whole exercise of leading stands to fail (Phillips Phillips, 2016). It puts too much faith on the leader who may not always be rational when leading. Bass Transformational theory: The strengths of transformational leadership are that it is useful when a new organizational vision is required. It is inspiration and can quickly raise employee motivation and morale in an organization (Suk Bong, Kihwan Seung-Wan, 2017). Weakness: It is often scant in the details which may lead to confused goals and targets. When not used within moral boundaries, it is subject to abuse. Question four- The best style of leading is the transformational model in that it carries changes which are lasting at the individual and organizational level. Employee awareness of the importance of the tasks they undertake is increased, while focus shifts to the team and not the individual. Employees will work hard to improve productivity being motivated because it is the right thing to do and not for the sake of reward. Question five- The Transformational Leadership is the most relevant for organizations, based on the article written by Simon Markland (2015), Transactional or Transformational-Which Leadership Style is Best? This article compares the transactional and transformational styles comparing their strengths and shortcomings. Famous and successful entrepreneurs such as Richard Branson and Bill Gates have used the transformational model of leading within their organizations. Question six- The research approach taken is qualitative that makes use of the analysis of textual materials and literature review of scholarly articles (Barnham, 2015). This involved doing research using internet resources in order to identify articles that focus on the above theorists and their models. Literature review of the articles perused was then used to choose three relevant models and the most relevant amongst the three. Question seven- The limitation for the research was to the practical application of the models that have been postulated above. Most of the theories are theoretical in nature and presented as such in the articles used. There is no linkage with empirical evidence as to their claims in organizational application. The lack of accompanying quantitative research limits its authenticity in practical use and this may call for more quantitative studies to be undertaken in the future. References Barnham, C. (2015). Quantitative and qualitative research. International Journal of Market Research, 57(6), 837-854. doi:10.2501/IJMR-2015-070 Billig, M. (2015). Kurt Lewin's Leadership Studies and His Legacy to Social Psychology: Is There Nothing as Practical as a Good Theory? Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 45(4), 440-460. Daniels, V. (2017). Kurt Lewin Notes. Sonoma State University. Retrieved from https://web.sonoma.edu/users/d/daniels/lewinnotes.html Leadership Legacy Program. (2017). Robert House. Retrieved from https://www.ila-net.org/LeadershipLegacy/Robert_House.html Markland, S. (2015). Transactional or Transformational: Which Leadership style is Best? Switch and Shift. Retrieved from https://www.ceo.com/leadership_and_management/transactional-or-transformational-which-leadership-style-is-best/ Phillips, A. S., Phillips, C. R. (2016). Behavioral Styles of Path- Goal Theory: An Exercise for Developing Leadership Skills. Management Teaching Review, 1(3), 148. doi:10.1177/2379298116639725 Suk Bong, C., Kihwan, K., Seung-Wan, K. (2017). EFFECTS OF TRANSFORMATIONAL AND SHARED LEADERSHIP STYLES ON EMPLOYEES' PERCEPTION OF TEAM EFFECTIVENESS. Social Behavior Personality: An International Journal, 45(3), 377. doi:10.2224/sbp.5805 Sun, J., Chen, X., Zhang, S. (2017). A Review of Research Evidence on the Antecedents of Transformational Leadership. Education Sciences, 7