Leadership Post Bureaucracy Essay

Leadership is at the forefront to success of any organisational model, and twentieth-century research has clearly examined its role in the managing of individuals both in the bureaucratic and post-bureaucratic eras. The turn of the millennium excessively brought about with it a shift in the nature of the body of practise, today regarded as a dynamic, ever ever-changing and self-motivating avenue where lead practices encourage individuals to express their intuitive and creative thinking Rego, Sousa, Marques 2012. In light of this, post-bureaucratic approaches to lead be regarded as being more in sync with todays working crease milieu, where success of an organization is greenly attributed to the methods in which leadership practices can positively influence the psyche of individuals in spite of appearance an organization Meindl, Ehrlich, Dukerich 1985.This paper aims to deconstruct and critically evaluate the specific leadership traits and flairs post-bureaucracy, examini ng how the natural evolution in the physiological and psychological understanding of gay behaviour has influenced the way in which organisations are managed. Notions of trust, empowerment and the share right of employees in a post-bureaucratic workplace will all be explored, and the contrasting effectuate of bureaucratic practices examined. In order to make this argument one must ack noneledge that this seemingly utopian environment presents itself as merely other dimension in which leaders can conduct the processes within their organisational model, with it being necessary to consider that leadership style and effectiveness is largely determined by situational and contingent upon(p) factors influencing the ways in which organisations are managed.In analyzing the socio-economic considerations of the organization, Max Weber conveyed the idea of bureaucracy with the thought of transactional leadership. This style of thinking is characterized by the enforcing of normative rul es and regulations, strict discipline and systematic control Nikezic, Puric & Puric 2012. There is a clear focus on preserving theexisting state of affairs, where control is maintained and power established with autocratic processes dictating what is craved within organisations. Transactional leadership provides high levels of stability within organisations, frequently reflecting the economic conditions of the time, and alternative approaches to the ways in which individuals were managed were not often considered Nikezic & Markovic 2011. Bass 1985 extended upon this concept, highlighting the presence of contingent reciprocate or punishment as the basis for employee motivation and productivity. Although it ensures the efficient completion of organisational objectives, this approach to leadership fails to promote high levels of employee satisfaction and devotion required to achieve feats that extend beyond the realms of customary workplace goals.Post-bureaucracy theorists highl ight the breakdown in traditional modes of managerial authority proposed by Weber within organisations as a result of the increasing pressures the workplace is faced with due to globalization and technological advancements Johnson et al. 2009. Organisations begind a paradigm shift, where in order to continually evolve, develop and remain competitive in a explosive economic marketplace, were forced to adopt new ways of thinking that inspired resourceful and innovative methods to enigma solving.Burns 1978 introduced the complex notion of transforming leadership in his explanatory research of the political leaders of the time. In this model, common perceptions and understandings of the traditional leader and accomplice relationship are challenged. Leaders are characterized by their ability to stir up individuals through their idealized influence generated through charismatic tendencies, in turn establishing feelings of trust, admiration and a inclination to truly engage themselves in the organizational objectives Browning 2007. In transcending the boundaries of the symbiotic relationship between leader and follower, organisations eff a redesigning of traditional beliefs concerning leadership formerly focused on power and authoritative methods. Post-bureaucratic approaches to leadership furnish for the establishment of defining roles that concentrate on the support of individuals and honoring open methods of communication, whereleader and follower are focused on a common purpose and receive fulfillment working together in a synergized environment to achieve organizational goals Chaleff 2003.Although this newfound approach to leadership encourages the greater commitment of workers to the organization, the effects in regards to increased efficiency within the workplace and improved individual well being direct to be considered. A leaders behavioral characteristics and principles form the impetus for success as a mutational leader, and eventuality theories s uggest that to improve the effectiveness, leaders can align their style to meet the requirements of the group based on situational factors, as depicted through Brownings recount of Shackleton and his crews arduous journey on the endurance Browning 2007. The success of Shackletons transformational leadership style required the presence of definitive charismatic, inspirational and communicative qualities Dutton et al. 2002, and in circumstances where these traits are absent of the individual, no amount of technical skill or experience will assist the leader in achieving organizational objectives through increased employee motivation and performance.Leadership style in the post-bureaucratic era has been adapted to mirror the multifaceted ideas concerning human behaviour, and reflects how a change in office resulting in the empowerment of individuals within the workplace has allowed for businesses to incessantly improve their output and contribution to society. McGregor, in his 1960 work titled The Human Side of Enterprise discusses a number of preconceived connotations detailing assumptions of the nature of human beings. His philosophies provided the underlying basis in which organisations began to implement a new approach to leadership, whereby he formulated ii distinct theories regarding the human approach to work. Bureaucracy is represented by conjecture X, which can be likened to a transactional leadership style. The emphasis is on an individuals lack of ambition, motivation and desire to succeed, noting how it is only through autocratic methods of leadership will organizational objectives be reached Stewart 2010.In stark contrast, the post-bureaucratic concept proposed as Theory Y, encompasses a more holisticapproach to leadership, focusing on the self-realization of individuals in the workplace. McGregor ascertains that humans are active shapers of the organizational objectives they are presented with, and flourish when given the opportunity to assume a higher(prenominal)(prenominal) responsibility within their role. In challenging the existing paradigms that focused on the human desire to satisfy their physiological needs, the research supported a shift that was now centralized around self-actualization and esteem Maslow 1943. This new interlingual rendition of the working environment enabled leaders to implement strategies that promoted creativity and innovation amongst employees in their pursuit to achieve higher states of psychological satisfaction. The transference of power within organisations between leader and follower facilitated a restructuring of the workplace. There was now a clear avenue that better supported employee and organizational goals, allowing for the objectives of both parties to coincide, ultimately leading to higher levels of effectiveness and productivity required by the onset of economic globalization.The relationship between leader and follower can be described as a complex reciprocal understanding be tween parties that require clear and distinct channels of communication. Successful leadership forms the basis in which businesses achieve desired results that mirror the continued growth and development of the firm. organisational objectives will only be met when leaders can efficaciously articulate a vision amongst employees that assists in synchronizing the goals of the individual and organization. Post-bureaucracy has allowed for the practices and styles encompassment of the paradox that is leadership to be examined from another dimension, where we have witnessed a shift from a focus on the importance of specific leadership characteristics to a newfound analytical appreciation highlighting the interactions between leader and follower. In light of the ideas conveyed throughout foregoing research and the arguments presented within this paper detailing leadership in both the bureaucratic and post-bureaucratic eras, we can snip that there is no definitive approach to leadership t hat can be regarded as being more precise than another. Transactional leadership has long been steadfast and continues to thrive in organisations that regard stability and efficient modes of intersection paramount to their success, whilst transformational leadership concerns itself with satiating the psychological needs of the individual. Further research lends itself to exploring the consolidation of methods from both eras, analyzing the effects of implementing styles and traits often regarded as mutually exclusive.Reference ListBass, B.M. 1985, From transactional to transformational leadership Learning to share the vision, Journal of Organizational Dynamics, vol. 18, pp. 19-32.Browning, B.W. 2007, Leadership in desperate times An analysis of endurance Shackletons incredible voyage through the lens of leadership theory, Advances in Developing Human Resources, vol. 9, no.2, pp.183-98. Chaleff, I. 2003, The Courageous Follower Standing up to and for our leaders, Berrett-Koehler Publi shers, San Francisco. Dutton, J.E., Frost, P., Worline, M.C., Lilius, J.M. & Kanov, J.M. 2002, Leading in times of trauma, Harvard Business Review, vol. 80, no. 1, pp. 54-61. Johnson, P., Wood, G.T., Brewster, C.J. & Brookes, M. 2009, The rise of post-bureaucracy theorists fancy of organizational praxis? Journal of International Sociology, 24 (1). pp, 37-61. ISSN 1461-7242Lievens, F., Van Geit, P., Coetsier, P. 1997, Identification of transformational leadership qualities An examination of potential biases, European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, vol. 6, no. 4, pp. 415-430.Maslow, H.A., 1943, A Theory of Human Motivation, Psychological Review, vol. 50, no. 4, pp. 370-396. Meindl, J.R., Ehrlich, S.B. & Dukerich, J.M. 1985, The romance of leadership, Administrative Science Quarterly, vol.30, no.1, pp. 78-102. Nikezic, S., Markovic, S. 2011, Transformational leadership as a factor profound changes, eleventh Conference for research and development in mechanical industry, RaDMI 2011, SaTCIP (Scientific and technical center for intellectual property)Nikezic, S., Puric, S., Puric, J. 2012, Transactional and transformation leadership Development through changes, International Journal for Quality Research, vol. 6, no. 3, pp. 285-296. Rego, A., Sousa, F. & Marques, C. 2012, Authentic leadership promoting employees psychological capital and creativity, Journal of Business Research, vol. 65, no. 3, pp. 429-37. Stewart, M. 2010, Theories X and Y, Revisited, Oxford Leadership Journal, vol. 1, no. 3, pp. 1-5. Weber, M., 1947, The Theory of social and Economic Organization, Translated by A. M. Henderson & Talcott Parsons. New York The Free Press.