Leadership Styles From The Point Of View

When developing a template to assess which leadership styles are best suited to mitigate the effects of a decline in financial compensation, it is imperative to understand leadership theory. One of the first pioneers in leadership theory was Kurt Lewin. Kurt Lewin (1890–1947), was a prominent figure in psychology in his generation. He provided a solid foundation to the teachings of organizational development. In many circles he was known as the father of organizational development. He was best known for the development of field theory. Field theory was essential because it allowed business professionals to understand why undesirable behaviors was produced. It also taught how to bring about desirable behaviors. Field theory was developed in part because Lewin wanted to address organizational employee turnover.

A leadership philosophy helps to define and let others know what you expect, what things you value, and how you act as a leader. Different styles of leadership are needed for different situations. Every leader needs to know when and how to display a particular approach of leadership within a group. Leadership strategies define every leader’s personal leadership style. Three leadership styles of a counselor are the following: authoritarian style leaders, democratic style leaders, and laissez-faire style leaders.

Thesis statement: Leadership depends on the leader’s leadership style and there way of communicating ideas rather than the leader themselves. Both women and men believe in similar leadership styles however women prefer a more participative leadership approach.

Women are often seen as having the less desirable characteristics of managerial jobs. They are seen as less self-confident, more emotional, helpful, sympathetic, less analytical and less consistent persons. While men are seen as more aggressive, decisive, dominant, active, competitive, logical, self-confident individuals. They possess more leadership abilities than women (Oakley, 2000). Also, the physical appearance and way of dressing can serve as a barrier to advancement. Women try to overcome these differences by accentuating and imitating male characteristics and lessen their feminine aspects (Oakley,2000). When women dress themselves in a more conservative way, “the male way”, they are perceived as inauthentic. If they dress in ways that

In another meta-analysis, Paustain-Underdahl, Walker, and Woehr (2014) used 99 studies conducted between 1962 and 2011, mostly within the United States and Canada. Their goal was to determine how contextual factors including publication date, hierarchal level, percent of male raters, and rating source affect how effective leaders of different genders are seen to be. Their analysis was based on Role Congruity Theory. This theory states that male gender roles and leadership roles are congruent, while female gender roles and leadership roles are not congruent. For this theory, women in leadership positions get disapproval because they are not follow their female gender roles. The researchers found that, while the difference was not significant, men were seen as more effective in earlier publications. All male-dominated organizations favored male leaders over female leaders; however, the difference was only significant in some of them. In female-dominated fields, women leaders were favored as more effective. When comparing different level management positions, female leaders were favored in middle level positions. When the group of people rating the effectiveness of leaders was mostly women, women leaders were favored. Groups of raters that were more gender balanced rated male and female leaders equally. When people were asked to rate their own effectiveness as a leader, the results show male leaders as more effective than female leaders. However, when people rate the

Looking at the significant body of research on the topic of gendered leadership, the overwhelming opinion is that men and women are thought to behave differently in leadership positions. Analysis of the key traits of masculine and feminine leadership models shows that masculine models value “assertiveness, aggressiveness and a task-focused orientation” while feminine approaches value “empathy, cooperation, and collaboration with an intrapersonal orientation”. Men are thought to bring a “command and control” style to leadership and women a “mentor and coach.”

Leadership is a concept most people feel informed enough to discuss, but that few are truly educated sufficiently to comment on. Therefore, it is instructive to consider the leadership styles of people with very different approaches both to better understand the diversity underlying leadership, as well as to appreciate the effective and less effective strategies that underlie different leadership outcomes. For that reason, this essay will consider the styles of two leaders who are less visible in this highly contentious presidential election season: Jill Stein (the Green Party nominee) and Gary Johnson, the Libertarian candidate. The leadership styles of both are very different, yet they are aligned in the sense that both are outsider candidates struggling to gain momentum from a disaffected electorate. This essay begins with a theoretical discussion of leadership more generally and then turns to the two leaders as case studies, comparing and contrasting them and drawing conclusions about how they both work within the same public sphere and for putatively similar ends (i.e., gaining votes).

There are numerous factors that can cause leadership styles to vary and one aspect in which leadership styles can vary is by gender. There have been numerous debates and conversations about the differences in the way men lead and the way women lead; this could explain why the gender gap in corporate settings is so large. Although there is some debate that the gender gap does not actually exist, copious amounts of research has been done to disprove this.

Men in leadership were seen to be more authoritative than women and making it hard for their juniors to approach or interact with them freely. By being more approachable than men, women are thus able to use soft power or persuasion to make their organization run in a particular direction. It should be noted that it is quite economical to make people see the reason as to why they should perform their duties and in a particular way as opposed to hiring people to supervise them and make them follow the rules. This is one of the ways in which women performs exemplary better than men in that organizations are shelved of from human resources issues (Folkman, 2015).

Chemers perceived that there are three theoretical explanations for the main differences between male and female leadership. One difference, the most obvious, is biological differences, which is based around hormones and temperament. The second difference is culturally diversities. This tells that socialized roles are varied per culture. The final difference is structurally determined. The different sexs have very diverse organizational structures (Eagly, Makhijani, & Klonsky, 1992; Chemers, 2000). Placing practical differences aside, the essential problem with women leadership roles is actually seen in the attitudes of those around them. The attitudes people have towards women when they are the ones making decisions are a perception with no objectivity, formally known as a stereotype.

A number of studies focusing on gender and leadership style have been conducted in recent years. Their general conclusion is that males and females do use different styles. Specifically, women tend to adopt a more democratic or participative style with followers. Women are more likely to encourage participation, share power and information, and attempt to enhance follower’s self-worth (Robbins & Coulter, 2005,). In putting this in an organizational behavior perspective this shows me that women might well be more in tune with their emotional intelligence. A person with a high emotional intelligence level is in touch with their emotions and demonstrates self-management in their ability to control their moods and feelings productively and in staying motivated and focused even when facing leadership obstacles (Nahavandi, 2006). This type of leader leads through inclusion and relies on their charisma, expertise, contacts, and interpersonal skills to influence others. Women tend to use more of a transformational leadership style of motivating others by transforming their self-interest into organizational goals (Robbins & Coulter, 2005).

Despite there being evidence that men are perceived as more appropriate and effective leaders than women, a recent debate has risen in the press and academic literature (Underdahl, et al., 2014, p. 1129). The meta-analysis addressed the summary of the gender difference in perceptions of the effectiveness of their leadership (p. 1129). Results have been shown that when leadership contexts are considered, men and women do not different in regards to the effectiveness of leadership, on the other end of the spectrum women are rated to be more effective leaders than men (p. 1130). When

The purpose of this article was to examine women’s and men’s leadership styles, the effectiveness of the different leadership styles, and the true determination of effectiveness as a woman leader (Appelbaum et al, 2003, p. 43). The article present research conducted for theories examined. Comparing this week’s work assignment to this article, I notice a linkage to a few items. The comparable list that is closely related to parts of theories in the reading assignment are gender stereotypes; different leadership style effectiveness; developmental opportunity, and experience. All of these different topics are related to the Leadership Labyrinth.

Another factor in attaining a leadership position is the level of motivation that the pursuant possesses to obtain power. Individuals that are power motivated invest their time to seek opportunities to acquire the skills and experience necessary to be promoted to a leadership position. Results of a research study conducted by Schuh, et al. has shown that female employees reported lower levels of power motivation than male employees (Schuh, et al., 2013, p. 375). The results of this study show that approximately 26 percent of gender differences in leadership occupancy roles could be attributed to power motivation (Schuh, et al., 2013, p. 376). This reflects a link between leadership and a desire for power. However, it is important to consider that power motivation is not the sole contributor to gender differences in leadership. In spite of the many reasons that result in fewer women in management positions, it does not have to remain that way.

Looking back at the historical development of corporations and firms, one can find that these organizations are once created by men (Rao et. Al, 1999). Nowadays, more and more women become very successful in the organizations and they work hard to act at the high management levels in the corporations. In spite of it, the proportion of women leaders in the organizations is relatively low than men leaders. Then it has emerged a statement that “women must adopt male characteristics to succeed. The purpose of his report is to analyze “must women adopt male characteristics to succeed?”