How have you seen people react to changes in their work? The typical reaction is resistance. Such resistance can often sabotage the best efforts of management to drive change throughout the organization.
Leadership has a direct cause and effect relationship upon organizations and their success. Leaders determine values, culture, change tolerance and employee motivation.
They shape institutional strategies including their execution and effectiveness. Leaders can appear at any level of an institution and are not exclusive to management.
Successful leaders do, however, have one thing in common. Libraries require leadership just like business, government and non-profit organizations. With leadership potentially playing such a vital role in the success of information centers and patron experiences, it is useful to consider the different types of leaders and their potential impact on libraries as organizations.
Current leadership theories describe leaders based upon traits or how influence and power are used to achieve objectives. When using trait-based descriptions, leaders may be classified as autocratic, democratic, bureaucratic or charismatic. If viewing leadership from the perspective of the exchange of power and its utilization to secure outcomes, leaders are situational, transactional or transformational.
Understanding these different tropes can provide a vocabulary for discussion that can lead to meaningful, desired results. It bears noting that not all leaders are created equal, and leadership quality may vary enormously across industries or simply within an organization.
Below is a brief examination of each common leadership style listed above and their potential impact on a group as well as their relative usefulness.
Typically, these leaders are inexperienced with leadership thrust upon them in the form of a new position or assignment that involves people management. There is no shared vision and little motivation beyond coercion. Commitment, creativity and innovation are typically eliminated by autocratic leadership.
In fact, most followers of autocratic leaders can be described as biding their time waiting for the inevitable failure this leadership produces and the removal of the leader that follows. Bureaucratic Bureaucratic leaders create, and rely on, policy to meet organizational goals.
Policies drive execution, strategy, objectives and outcomes. Bureaucratic leaders are most comfortable relying on a stated policy in order to convince followers to get on board.
In doing so they send a very direct message that policy dictates direction. Bureaucratic leaders are usually strongly committed to procedures and processes instead of people, and as a result they may appear aloof and highly change adverse. Policies are simply inadequate to the task of motivating and developing commitment.
The specific risk with bureaucratic leaders is the perception that policies come before people, and complaints to that effect are usually met with resistance or disinterest. Policies are not in themselves destructive, but thoughtlessly developed and blindly implemented policy can de-motivate employees and frustrate desired outcomes.
The central problem here is similar to the one associated with autocratic leaders. Both styles fail to motivate and have little impact on people development.
In fact, the detrimental impact could be significant and far outweigh any benefits realized by these leadership styles. Democratic It sounds easy enough. Instead of one defined leader, the group leads itself. Egalitarian to the core, democratic leaders are frustrated by the enormous effort required to build consensus for even the most mundane decisions as well as the glacial pace required to lead a group by fiat.
The potential for poor decision-making and weak execution is significant here. The biggest problem with democratic leadership is its underlying assumptions that everyone has an equal stake in an outcome as well as shared levels of expertise with regard to decisions.
While democratic leadership sounds good in theory, it often is bogged down in its own slow process, and workable results usually require an enormous amount of effort. Charismatic By far the most successful trait-driven leadership style is charismatic.
Charismatic leaders have a vision, as well as a personality that motivates followers to execute that vision. As a result, this leadership type has traditionally been one of the most valued.
Charismatic leadership provides fertile ground for creativity and innovation, and is often highly motivational. It sounds like a best case scenario.Nov 06, · The brand starts with the employees, which are the catalysts for a healthy company.
What they say, how they act, how they talk to customers, and more importantly, how they buy into the . Need for Values Review The values statement should describe the guiding principles by which the staff is expected to function to achieve the organization’s mission.
VRIO framework is the tool used to analyze firm’s internal resources and capabilities to find out if they can be a source of sustained competitive advantage. Strategies Essays, Term Papers and Book Reports. This essay will discuss and justify the teaching and learning strategies outlined in the Unit of work.
Burnett & Myers () note that language and literacy is the key to the way in which people live their lives. The External Environment: Threats and Opportunities Within the context. Organizational behavior is an academic discipline concerned with describing, understanding, predicting, and controlling human behavior in an organizational environment.
The field is particularly concerned with group dynamics, how individuals relate to and participate in groups, how leadership is. Simply put, organizational culture is “the way we do things around here.” Organizational culture consists of three parts: artifacts, espoused values, and underlying assumptions.
 Artifacts are the easiest to notice, but yet their meanings may remain elusive to outsiders.