M005LON

Regular Assignment 1
Peer Assessment

Submitted by:-
Navpreet singh- 3497508
Submission date-28 Feb. 2011
Understanding leadership can at times feel strange and deceptive, one of the reasons for which is
the amount of research done on the same. Leadership has been a keen interest of study for years
and research work still continues. The importance of leadership, good leaders and managers is felt in
today’s business environment than ever before. The recent recessionary wave has also helped us to
understand the dependence of a business on leaders.

Leadership theories themselves have evolved over the ages from the early traits approach to the
recent transformational theory where each has tried to examine and explain the behaviour of a
person. The earlier theories of leadership like those given by Drucker and Bass highlighted that
leaders were born and not made and how certain traits in people can bring about leadership
qualities in them. These theories were highly criticized as these were not helping organisations find
good leaders. As Mullins highlights the limitations “...there is bound to be some subjective
judgement in determining who is a good leader…the lists of possible traits tend to be very long and
there is not always agreement on the most important…it ignores the situational factors”
Mullins(2010:377).

The theoretical balance however shifted towards styles as those of situational leadership or the
personal-behaviour approaches to leadership. The models here try to focus upon the leader, the
follower and the situation they are in, in particular. The graph given by Hersey facilitates such an
understanding at situational leadership which has gained prominence in the current scenario where
businesses are highly unstable. This theory focused upon the readiness level of the people the leader
tried to influence. Mullins (2010:389). This theory marked also the importance of the followers and
how a leader has to change and adapt to a given situation and the ‘readiness’ of his followers. This
theory also gained importance as the earlier approaches to explain leadership failed and did not help
organisations understand the concept.

The most recent understanding of leadership is the theories of transformational and transactional
leadership. By transactional leadership it is meant “a leadership style based on the setting of clear
goals and objectives for followers and the use of rewards and punishments to encourage
compliance.” Transformational leadership as the word signifies is about transforming your followers.
It is a term which is generally used with charismatic leaders. They are the leaders whom the people
want to become and more or less are idols than leaders. “…it is about transcendental goals and self-
actualization” Burns (1978). This style of leadership is of high importance in this age with the amount
of globalization and this being the era of multinational corporations. A leader has to realize the
importance of his/her followers needs and in a way inculcate the essence of the organisational
framework and its ultimate goals into the employees. All this is done in such a way that the followers
understand the leader and reciprocate him to attain the final objectives. It therefore can be summed
in the words “lead by example”. According to Yukl, there are four basic components of
transformational leadership viz. ‘idealised influence, inspirational motivation, intellectual simulation
and individualised consideration.’ These serve as a platform for us to understand the theory of
transformational leadership and the manner in which it can be applied. By and large, what I
understand after reading about the different theories of leadership is that no matter which theory is
actually seen the main essence of leadership is about influencing.

As unclear as leadership theories are most agree that there is a difference between leading and
managing. Many argue that this difference is only minor as leadership is believed to be executable
by any individual in spite of the hierarchal position in an organisation. After my reading and
understanding of the theories of leading and managing and looking at the difficulties which face
today’s businesses, I believe that the true success for an organisation can only be achieved when
there is a synchronisation between the two(leadership and management). One cannot only depend
on good managers nowadays but what is important is to have an essential mix of both worlds-a
manager who is also a vibrant leader. The following comparison is, however, helpful in developing a
difference between the two.

On getting to a criterion on how to reflect back and assist each other in giving feedback we thought
about the fact that how not only leadership but also management is equally important in a company.
We decided upon giving one on one feedback and evaluate a person on Fayol’s 5 elements of
management and the theory of transformational leadership. Therefore, we in a group were judging a
person on their forecasting, organising, commanding, coordinating and controlling skills. Apart from
this we would also try and analyse a person’s confidence level, communication ability, team work
and influence abilities. The amalgamation of all of the above skills makes up a good leader, a leader
who is capable enough to lead a company in these rough times.

We came upon these criteria after our successful attempt at the Lego game in which not only were
we winning from the first round itself but upon how after choosing a leader we did win again but
improved upon our completion time considerably. It showed us that how people after getting a good
direction and a clear view of their task are able to perform much better and in a way which also
benefits their team in the accomplishment of the task in hand. We noticed that the leader (in this
case I was the leader) not only showed signs of Fayol’s theory of a manager but also represented a
leader who signified the attributes like those highlighted by Bass and Burns in their research. This
proved to us the fact that how much are good leaders important for a task to be completed
efficiently and effectively. We as a group understood this fact and went on to analyse these qualities
in each other and gave individual feedback keeping in mind these virtues.

The feedback I received from my colleagues was quite synonymous. Most of them reflected upon
that how after I became a leader for my group in the Lego game I was able to provide a clear
direction for the team and corrected people where ever someone went wrong. The term many of
my friends used were that of ‘mutual leadership’. It was that how after a joint deliberation and
thought we planned about how we could go about the task and the best way to apply our skills in
the successful completion. There was division of work and everyone knew what they were
responsible for. The leader on the other hand did his share of the work correctly and also performed
a continuous check upon the overall completion of the task. I being the leader understood my duty
and made use of efficient communication which was very essential as one of my colleagues was
blind folded. I was appreciated about my commanding and controlling skills as I pin-pointed a person
when he/she did not do their share of the work properly. As an organiser I was too commended by
all of my peers as they were happy under my leadership they knew exactly what was expected out of
them and that the end result was in our favour. All of us were proud of the fact that we won as a
team and under able leadership.

On my influence skills and confidence level I did not get as good a response as I expected and I think
it is under this area in which I will have to work upon. Some of my peers gave the example of how
under the blogger case study I dint do much for my department being the head and was not a
correct voice for the employees under the department. I therefore couldn’t influence my director to
have the decision under my favour which in turn affected my confidence levels and after a point I did
not show concern. I had to realise that the organisation in itself was a bigger team of which my
department was a part.

After my feedback and from my analysis I have come to realise the importance of synergy. That how
important it is to have your mind channelized in the correct direction and for the greater good. It is
important to think long term and make decisions in a manner that will not only help people whom I
lead but everyone ‘who is in the same boat’. I understand my strengths lie in communication and
organising and it is these qualities which will take me further representing a mix of leadership and
management styles. At the same time I have to work upon my influence abilities and try and get
more confidence by learning about things around me and communicating about them. Also, my peer
feedback was established by more or less 2 instances only and thus it tells me the importance of first
impression and how people accept leaders instantly.

After this process I understood that how a leader is more or less a manager but a manager that
people want. It is always helpful when there is guidance from someone of the higher authority for
e.g. we had a briefing note on how to complete this assignment from someone of the higher
authorities but more essentially someone whom we have accepted as our leaders. There are these
strengths that I see in myself and my weaknesses that I have to build upon in time and get ready for
mightier challenges.
References

Mullins, L.J. (2010) management and organisational behaviour. : Pearson education limited

Yukl, G.A. (2009) leadership in organisations: global edition. : Pearson higher education

Transactional leadership [online] available from <http://www.encyclopedia.com> [24 feb 2011]