Cultural Leadership In The Outside World Business Essay Example

in understanding the importance of their individual contributions to the organization's overall effectiveness.

A "complex situation" is defined as a scenario where a manager or leader struggles to resolve conflicts within themselves and their team members. Many business people believe they communicate effectively, but even the best communicators can find their skills undermined when faced with unexpected challenges, potential embarrassment, feelings of being misunderstood, or surprising behavior from others.

Open discussion is one way to manage conflict at times. Directors work together to create a positive working environment where members enjoy their work and strive towards achieving group goals. However, there are instances where everything falls apart and people exhibit inappropriate and unhelpful behavior.Many leaders feel powerless in situations where workplace abuse, poor performance, dishonesty, theft, disrespect, and blame are prevalent. Having proper strategies in place is crucial to prevent these difficult situations from escalating and ensure a positive learning experience for all involved. A competent leader will use an assessment to identify the real issues and goals and determine underlying causes in order to develop an action plan for resolution. Research suggests that employees who understand the impact of their work are more motivated and have higher morale. Change management is viewed as a simple process that starts with recognizing the need for change and having the motivation to make positive changes. Effective leaders help teams perform better while also attending to individual needs. Collaboration and creating a supportive environment are essential for achieving success. The text emphasizes the importance of team-building activities in clarifying objectives, norms, and improving problem-solving skills among team members. According to Bolman and Deal's human resource theorists, constructive personal responses are

possible even in highly politicized situations. They highlight Argyris' example to emphasize the significance of interpersonal competency as a fundamental managerial skill.
However, directors often hinder their effectiveness by being overly controlling, disregarding emotions, and lacking awareness of their impact on others. In 1952, C.A. Gibb concluded that any comprehensive leadership theory should integrate various variables, such as the leader's personality, followers' attitudes and issues, the group dynamics, and the situational factors. Argyris and Schon further expand on interpersonal effectiveness by discussing how individual behavior is influenced by personal theories for action. These theories-in-use guide actual behavior and serve as implicit plans or rules for how to act. The central premise of "Theory-in-use" is that an organization is a dangerous place where one must watch out for themselves, otherwise someone else will take advantage. This belief causes individuals to follow a predictable set of steps in their attempts to influence others.

For example, Anne and Harry were both responsible for different territories in the same city. Harry was 25 years older than Anne and had been with the company for twenty years longer. He had a quick temper when someone got in his way. While Anne tried to maintain a positive and professional relationship with him, she often found Harry to be patronizing and arrogant.

During one afternoon discussion on marketing plans, Anne's subordinate named Mark tried to support her viewpoints but was continuously interrupted by Harry.
The text illustrates a pattern of exchanges between Mark and Harry, with "Theory-in-use" blaming the other side. Mark angrily expressed frustration to Harry, stating that if he would listen to others and think before speaking, progress would be made. In response, Harry

abruptly adjourned the meeting.

The next day, Harry called Anne and demanded that she fire Mark. He grew angry and shouted that firing him was necessary for getting along in the company. However, Anne calmly informed Harry that Mark reported to her. Despite this, Harry confidently predicted that Anne would regret her decision.

Three months later, Steve informed Anne about a rumor spreading that he promoted her due to an affair they were having. Both Anne and Harry concluded that Harry was responsible for creating this situation.

The exchanges between Harry and Anne demonstrate a clear pattern where blame is placed on the other side. According to "Theory-in-use," Harry believes his actions are caused by both Mark and Anne while being dismissive himself. On the other hand, Anne blames Harry for being biased, unreasonable, and indirect. This forms the fundamental premise at the center.

Model I assumptions lead to limited learning, strained relationships, and impaired decision-making within complex organizations operating under this model. Consequently, such organizations are rarely happy places.

Regarding question 3,the definition of a top-down organizational structure refers to how people and processes are managed at the highest level in a vertical structureTop leaders have the responsibility of disseminating information, planning, and budgeting. Decision making predominantly occurs at the top level in vertical organizations, where power is concentrated. This can lead to disjointed work and lost communication. The top-down structure is a popular choice in modern management as it allows objectives to be set by top management and clearly communicated to colleagues. Clarity is crucial in adhering to this approach as uncertainty can result in failure. Formality plays a significant role in implementing this approach, with power being

concentrated and leaders having complete control.

The emotions and sentiments of top directors heavily influence all decisions made. If team members feel that their opinions are not valued or heard, their contributions become useless and ineffective. Many companies following a traditional management style experience a lack of communication between team members and top leaders. Research indicates that this type of management structure often decreases productivity due to the manager's complete control over the team, resulting in unnecessary project delays. Consequently, team members believe that their opinions hold no importance or influence within the team.

However, there are instances when top-down structures can prove beneficial. For instance, in a retail store setting, it may be necessary for a sales director to maintain control over junior salespeople to minimize operational errors.The manager has the ability to assign less important tasks to experienced staff members, allowing them to efficiently train new salespeople. Having a large inventory makes it easier to identify any errors made by the responsible salesperson in the final product. The senior person in charge has the power to correct these errors, but this type of organizational structure requires extensive coordination. However, businesses that offer services or operate through specific processes, like printing companies, may find a top-down structure ineffective. In such cases, forming teams with expertise in graphic design, sales, and printing is more advantageous. These teams focus on their individual tasks and promote self-management for greater job satisfaction. The New York Times is an example of a successful organization that transitioned from centralized power to a collaborative environment. Previously, editors had full control over decision-making and there was inadequate collaboration among journalists leading to low motivation

among colleaguesThe managing executives of the newspaper realized the need for more freedom and a change in management style. It took some time to implement bottom-up management, but it was worth it. According to employees at the New York Times, collaboration became more efficient and team members now work together more productively. In relation to question 5, retrenchment is a planned elimination of positions or jobs as part of a restructuring strategy. This involves rebuilding the organization's strength to align with workforce size and resource allocation. Downsizing has traditionally been used and will continue to be important in the future. However, there have been challenges in quickly gathering managers for discussions when changes are needed. To survive in an ever-changing society and compete with domestic and international rivals, organizations must reinvent themselves. Some companies in Hong Kong have moved beyond downsizing as a reaction to economic downturns by embracing the advantages of being smaller, such as becoming Small and Medium Enterprises (SMEs) and leveraging opportunities for organizational reform. Many reasons for downsizing stem from economic and technological changes in the business environmentDeregulation and easier market entry have forced companies to streamline their management structures and reduce bureaucracy in order to cut costs and speed up decision-making. This requires managers to reorganize teams, which can present challenges. If the restructuring is limited to a specific department or team, it becomes difficult to effectively assess overall performance. Managers must make significant communication efforts. Sometimes downsizing involves eliminating hierarchical levels and transitioning decision-making to a decentralized form, applicable in both public and private sectors.

The main goal of organizational restructuring is to enhance efficiency and increase customer satisfaction. Key

factors for achieving better overall efficiency include reduced costs, improved communication throughout the organization, and decentralized decision-making. Ultimately, these efforts contribute to improving corporate performance.

Successful downsizing allows organizations to save money significantly by eliminating middle managers and their teams, reducing costs and time expenditures. Consumers can directly communicate with top management as a result of this downsizing strategy, leading to enhanced customer satisfaction.Efficiency, characterized by producing more products with less labor input, is a primary outcome of downsizing. This enhanced efficiency ultimately leads to higher profits, often being the main objective for organizations. Downsizing can involve changing job positions or products, as well as relocating operations to a more cost-effective location where workers may be willing to accept lower wages and poor working conditions. However, downsizing is perceived negatively by employees, customers, and the public due to the significant impact on society caused by many workers losing their jobs. One disadvantage of downsizing is the lack of reliable leadership as senior executives often have minimal communication with employees, resulting in decreased morale. Additionally, downsizing creates an increased workload for fewer employees who may struggle to effectively handle the additional responsibilities. Companies must also address negative emotions experienced by remaining employees who witness their friends and coworkers losing their jobs. Retraining, reskilling, and adjusting the working culture of remaining employees can be costly endeavors for organizations undertaking downsizing. The organization must be prepared for reduced employee productivity which could lead to a decrease of three to four hours per day. The costs associated with restructuring may involve hiring additional staff.
The first step in assessing a decrease is to determine whether employees should be laid off permanently

or temporarily. This stage of downsizing typically affects middle managers, department heads, and lower-level employees under their supervision. By eliminating hierarchical levels, the chain of command has fewer layers for decisions to pass through. As a result, upper-level management must oversee a larger number of employees after terminating several layers. Approving every decision at this level would lead to overload and potential inefficiency within the organization. To address this, decision-making authority is delegated down to lower levels once the initial downsizing phase is completed.

Research indicates that downsizing often negatively impacts company performance rather than being beneficial. Studies show that more than 50 percent of downsized companies fail to meet their financial objectives, making this strategy costly for corporations. In addition to fiscal concerns, companies also have to consider employee morale and public perception when choosing to downsize. The loss of workers due to downsizing can have a negative impact overall. The remaining employees need time for recovery in order to regain their morale levels.
The downsizing plan may cause guilt for coworkers who were let go and hurt feelings for those who feel left behind. If the workload increases, it can also lead to anger. It is crucial that a downsizing plan takes into account the negative psychological impact it may have on remaining staff. Downsizing often results in "survivor syndrome," where managers and staff experience negative emotions such as anxiety, guilt, apathy, and detachment. This leads to low morale, decreased productivity, reduced quality, and more workplace injuries. Furthermore, there are often rumors and gossip that contribute to a negative image of the company among clients and the general public. For example, "Towngas," a utility company

in Hong Kong listed on the Hang Seng index, implemented a downsizing program through natural attrition to reduce staff from 2,400 to 2,000 by the year 2000. To handle this change effectively, Mr. Alfred Chan appointed a Change Director who emphasized quality circles, creativity training,and problem-solving training.The top management team has initiated various cross-functional projects aimed at improving work quality.Although no one has been laid off involuntarily,tensions arose when blue-collar employees expressed fear of job loss due to restructuring efforts during meetings announcing the company's plans.Tensions further escalated during the Asian financial crisisThe company reassured its employees that there would be no salary reductions or layoffs, alleviating fears. Instead, redeployment and retraining programs were implemented. Employees who lost their previous positions were placed in a pool and provided full wages while undergoing retraining and waiting for suitable new internal job opportunities to become available. However, the idea of being in the pool still caused anxiety among employees. Negative reactions from employees at Towngas created a poor perception of the company, despite reports of no mandatory layoffs.

Moving on to another topic, power can be defined as one person's ability to influence another's behavior to fulfill their own desires. Power is used for goal achievement and relies on follower dependence. Scarce resources within organizations, along with enduring differences among individuals and groups, bring power and conflict to the forefront of organizational decision-making. While power is often narrowly defined in direction theory and research (Fiol, 2001; Shen & Cannella, 2002), various forms of power within organizations have been identified by scholars and social scientists. According to Scott (2001), power can be categorized based on its impact on social

action: either by influencing costs and benefits associated with different actions or by restricting the range of available actions.The text discusses the various types of power within organizations and their significance. "Personal power" refers to desirable resources or traits possessed by a leader or individual. The term "Referent Power," coined by French and Raven (1959), describes influence derived from attributes like attractiveness, social skills, persistence, and vision. Barack Obama, for example, expanded his influence through charm and wit during his presidency.

On the other hand, "Formal Power" is based on an individual's position in an organization and grants them the ability to enforce or reward, either through formal authority or control over information. It's important to note that authority isn't the only source of power as individuals can draw power from other sources as well.

Governments possess "position power," where certain roles confer legitimate authority. For instance, professors assign grades while judges resolve disputes. Lastly, there is "Coercive Power," which relies on fear as a means of control.

The text emphasizes that power plays a role in restraining, blocking, interfering with, or penalizing others. Additionally discussed is the concept of "Legitimate Power," obtained through one's position in an organizational hierarchy. In some cases, dominant members of an alliance hold legitimate power. However, senior management often controls large corporations rather than shareholders or the board of directors.
"Expert Power," which is based on specific skills or knowledge, is another form of power discussed. "Reward Power" is also associated with the ability to distribute valuable rewards such as money or jobs. Achieving goals in an organization requires navigating through a network of individuals and groups, making alliances and relationships crucial for

success. Those who do not build networks often face difficulties in reaching their objectives. In organizations, alliances are formed when members believe they can achieve more together than apart due to shared interests. The concept of authorization, referring to the legitimate privilege of making decisions, is highlighted by structural theoreticians. Directors play a role in making rational choices and overseeing actions for proper implementation. Networks and alliances provide access to decision-making domains where certain groups have differential access granted by organizations and political systems. When decisions are made, those holding positions of power ensure that their interests are well-represented. The government's ability to make binding decisions is limited by the multiple sources of power held by partisans. Governments have the right to make decisions that bind subordinates, but any member of an alliance can potentially become a zealot by exerting bottom-up pressure.
According to Gammon (1968), governments are both the targets of influence and the initiators of social control, while potential zealots play opposite roles as initiators of influence and targets of social control. This dynamic can be seen in the relationship between parents and children within a family. Parents act as governments by making binding decisions on matters such as playtime, bedtime, or television viewing. They enforce social control, while children are the recipients of these parental decisions. In response, children attempt to influence their parents by advocating for changes in rules or pointing out perceived unfairness. They may even try to divide their parents by approaching them one at a time after being refused by one parent. Children may also form alliances with others, such as grandparents, to strengthen their negotiating position. The concept

of authority is crucial for anyone in a formal position because societal control relies on it. Officeholders can exert control as long as zealots respect or fear them enough for their power to remain intact. However, if zealots perceive current governments as excessively wicked or unqualified to continue, they may risk attempting to gain control unless they view the government as too formidable. If partisan resistance becomes too strong, authority systems may collapse rapidly.Officeholders who solely depend on their position's power often encounter opposition and are overtaken, outmaneuvered, or overwhelmed by individuals who excel at utilizing various other types of power. Kotter (1985) argues that manager roles inherently possess a "power gap" since relying solely on positional power is usually inadequate for achieving success. This gap can be bridged through the utilization of expertise, rewards, coercion, alliances, access, reputation, framing, and personal power. Power is an essential resource within organizations and significantly influences decision-making across all levels.