Cost of Capital

MBL 921-M ASSIGNMENT 1

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Content                                                                                                                                                                                                

1.        Introduction                                                                        

2.        Operational level

2.1        Characteristics of leaders viewed as negative

2.2        Steps that leaders can take to change negative perceptions about them

2.3        Attributes that followers must have to persuade leaders to respect and trust them more        

3.        Business level.

3.1        Characteristics of leaders viewed as negative

3.2        Steps that leaders can take to change negative perceptions about them

3.3        Attributes that followers must have to persuade leaders to respect and trust them more

4.        Corporate level.

4.1        Characteristics of leaders viewed as negative

4.2        Steps that leaders can take to change negative perceptions about them

4.3        Attributes that followers must have to persuade leaders to respect and trust them more        

5.        Summary.                                                

6.        Reflective summary of groups learning                                                                

7.        Member learning points from studying other leaders    

8.        References                                                                                        

1. Introduction

John Quincy Adams defines a leader using this criteria ‘’If your actions inspire others to dream more, do more and become more you are a leader’’. This definition aptly defines a leader in many different contexts. Leadership is arguably one of the most heavily researched areas in psychology and business (Kedharnath, 2011). Leadership is quite a complex subject as there are many theories and papers on what make a good leadership. Sy (2010) argued that leaders categorize and have cognitive prototypes of followers in the same manner that followers have cognitive prototypes of leaders, and that these follower prototypes can have important influences on follower and organizational outcomes. The LMX theory is also used to describe the role-making process between the leader and individuals as well as the exchange relationship that develops over time. The attributing theory for both the leader and follower were also evaluated in this paper.

The group looked a real life cases where followers at different level of the organization we giving their view on 3 key questions.

• Are there characteristics of leaders in the organization that are viewed as negative?
• What can leaders do to change negative perceptions about them?
• What attributes should followers have to persuade leaders to respect and trust them as followers?

The answers were varied from one organization to another, in one of the organization it was seen that at the operational level the bulk of the followers at this level made attributions about the leader’s competence and intentions. They mostly used the leaders actions especially is in certain situation to reach conclusions about responsibility or failure. The followers at this level also judged their leaders on competence, where they viewed their supervisors as good leader if they had the qualifications that were required for that position versus leaders who were promoted amongst themselves who might not have the ‘tertiary” qualifications for the job.

There was strong evidence of a low exchange relationship at this level as most followers felt amongst other things as if the communication was one way and there is not much trust from the leader. The followers at business level showed the same low-exchange relationship when compared to the operational level employee. The followers at this level also viewed the actions of the leaders as a key indicator of competence but also judge competence on the successfulness of the leaders unit or area of responsibility. At the corporate level there was a high-exchange relationship mostly due to the fact that there is a small number of individuals that one has to report to and there was a high degree of delegation at the level above.

2. Operational level

2.1 Characteristics of leaders viewed as negative 

The group at operational level had quite a large number of leader characteristics that they view as negative in the organization. It must be take into account that at this level the style of leadership is typically transactional as there are certain tasks to perform and provide rewards or punishments to team members based on performance results. The jobs at this level are heavily task orientated, power is mostly used at this level and influence is not used as much at this level of the organization. This can clearly be shown in the reply of most of the employees at this level, when asked the above mentioned question. Many had answers such as the following:

• Leaders wanted things done their way
• Leaders have ‘one way’ communications where were are only required to follow instruction’s. They are also not willing to share information
• Using the threat of discipline if things were not done exactly the way they wanted, even though the results might be the same at the end.
• Setting unrealistic expectations
• The only communication is when giving instructions and thus being made to feel like just being a tool. and not willing to assist with information on specialized skills
• Leaders lack interest on peripheral programs (like programs that groom or empower followers) but are interested on the bottom line i.e. service delivery

The above answer clearly shows that power is mostly used at this level of the organization, there was no evidence of influence on the part of the leader in any of the replies. There were quite a lot of negative characteristics that were mentioned by the followers at this level of which many are valid but some were consistent with the use of power as many felt there were not consulted enough on many of the decisions that were being taken by leadership at this level.

The bulk of the followers at this level had quite a large number of negative characteristics that they viewed as negative from their leaders. They alluded to the fact that leaders did not have a lot of confidence in them as they were only required to be follow instructions. This led them to view the leaders as people that stifled their creativity and did not feel that much inspired at work. There is also the element of a very low-exchange relationship at this level as most followers felt that the leader do not trust and respect them and therefore feel that they are being considered or valued at a level of tools.

...