Leading

Leadership has been described as the “process of social influence in which one person can enlist the aid
and support of others in the accomplishment of a common task”. Definitions more inclusive of followers
have also emerged. Alan Keith of Genentech states that, "Leadership is ultimately about creating a way
for people to contribute to making something extraordinary happen." According to Ken "SKC" Ogbonnia,
"effective leadership is the ability to successfully integrate and maximize available resources within the
internal and external environment for the attainment of organizational or societal goals."

Styles

Leadership style refers to a leader's behavior. It is the result of the philosophy, personality and
experience of the leader.

Autocratic or authoritarian style

Under the autocratic leadership style, all decision-making powers are centralized in the leader, as
with dictator leaders.

They do not entertain any suggestions or initiatives from subordinates. The autocratic
management has been successful as it provides strong motivation to the manager. It permits
quick decision-making, as only one person decides for the whole group and keeps each decision
to himself until he feels it is needed to be shared with the rest of the group.

Participative or democratic style

The democratic leadership style favors decision-making by the group as shown, such as leader
gives instruction after consulting the group.

They can win the co-operation of their group and can motivate them effectively and positively.
The decisions of the democratic leader are not unilateral as with the autocrat because they arise
from consultation with the group members and participation by them.

Laissez-faire or free rein style

A free-rein leader does not lead, but leaves the group entirely to itself as shown; such a leader
allows maximum freedom to subordinates, i.e., they are given a free hand in deciding their own
policies and methods.

Different situations call for different leadership styles. In an emergency when there is little time
to converge on an agreement and where a designated authority has significantly more experience
or expertise than the rest of the team, an autocratic leadership style may be most effective;
however, in a highly motivated and aligned team with a homogeneous level of expertise, a more
democratic or laissez-faire style may be more effective. The style adopted should be the one that

1
most effectively achieves the objectives of the group while balancing the interests of its
individual members.

Narcissistic leadership

Various academics such as Kets de Vries, Maccoby and Thomas have identified narcissistic
leadership as an important and common leadership style.

Narcissistic leadership is a common form of leadership. The narcissism may be healthy or

destructive although there is a continuum between the two. To critics, "narcissistic leadership is
driven by unyielding arrogance, self-absorption, and a personal egotistic need for power and
admiration."

This leads almost inevitably to a deterioration in the organization's performance. "The

narcissistic leader prefers the sparkle and glamour of well-orchestrated illusions to the tedium
and method of real accomplishment." Narcissists profess company loyalty but are only really
committed to their own agendas, thus organizational decisions are founded on the narcissist's
own interests rather than the interests of the organization as a whole, the various stakeholders, or
the society in which the organization operates.

Toxic leadership

A toxic leader is someone who has responsibility over a group of people or an organization, and
who abuses the leader-follower relationship by leaving the group or organization in a worse-off
condition than when s/he first found them.

Toxic leaders disseminate their poison through over-control. They define leadership as

being in control.

What are the symptoms of toxic leadership?

In a toxic leadership environment, people are rewarded for agreeing with the boss and
punished for thinking differently. In a toxic leadership environment, “yes” people are
rewarded and are promoted to leadership roles, while people who more fully engage their
mental resources, critical thinking, and questioning skills are shut out from decisionmaking
and positions of influence.

2
Varieties of individual power

According to Patrick J. Montana and Bruce H. Charnov, the ability to attain these unique powers
is what enables leadership to influence subordinates and peers by controlling organizational
resources. The successful leader effectively uses these power(s) to influence employees, and it is
important for the leader to understand the uses of power to strengthen the leadership functioning.

The authors distinguish the following types of organizational power:

 Legitimate Power refers to the different types of professional positions within an organization
structure that inherit such power (e.g. Manager, Vice President, Director, Supervisor, etc.).
These levels of power correspond to the hierarchical executive levels within the organization
itself. The higher position such as President of the company has a higher power than the rest of
professional positions in the hierarchical executive levels.

 Reward Power is the power given to managers that attain administrative power over a range of
rewards. Employees who work for managers desire the reward from the manager and will be
influenced by receiving it as a result of work performance. The rewards may be pay raisse or
promotions.

 Coercive Power is the manager's ability to punish an employee. Punishment can be a mild
punishment such as a suspension or a serious punishment such as termination.

 Expert Power is attained by the manager due to his or her own talents such as skills, knowledge,
abilities, or previous experience. A manager which has this power within the organization may
be a very valuable and important manager in the company.

 Charisma Power A manager who has charisma will have a positive influence on workers, and
create the opportunity for interpersonal influence. A person has charisma, and this will confer
great power as a manager.

 Referent Power a power that is gained by association. A person who has power by association is
often referred to assistant or deputy.

 Information Power a person who has possession of important information at an important time
when such information is needed to organizational functioning. Someone who has this
information knowledge has genuine power. For example, a manager's secretary would be in a
powerful position if the secretary has information power.

3
 What Makes for An Effective Leader?
Passion
An effective leader is a person with a passion for a cause that is larger than they are. Someone with a
dream and a vision that will better society, or at least, some portion of it. I think a very key question has
to be answered: Can someone who is a charismatic leader, but only to do evil or to promote herself, be
a leader -- especially if she has a large following?” I would say no, she is a manipulator.

Also, without passion, a leader will not make the necessary courageous and difficult decisions
and carry them into action. This is not to imply that all decisions are of this nature. But you can
be sure, some of them will be. The leader without a passion for a cause will duck.

Holder of Values
Leadership implies values. A leader must have values that are life-giving to society. It is the only kind of
leadership we need. This then also implies values that are embedded in respect for others. So often we
think of people skills or caring about people as being “warm and fuzzy.” I think a leader can be of varying
‘warmth and fuzziness,” but a leader has to respect others. You can’t lead without it. Otherwise we are
back to manipulation. Respect means also that one can deal with diversity -- a critical need for a leader
in today’s world -- probably always has been, although diversity may have been more subtle in the
homogenous societies of the past.

Vision
This is a bit different than passion, but in other ways it isn’t separable. If one doesn’t care about a
subject, an issue, a system, then one won’t spend the time thinking about how it could or should be
different. Yet, one could have strong feelings about something and not good ideas, particularly if she
didn’t spend a good deal of time studying the topic. Thus a leader has to have some ideas about change,
about how the future could be different. Vision then is based on two components that leaders also
need: creativity and intellectual drive.

Creativity
One has to try to think out of the box to have good visions and to come up with effective strategies that
will help advance the vision. I’d also add here the need for a sense of humor. It’s a creative skill that is in
great need by leaders. We should read the funnies more!

Intellectual Drive and Knowledge

I believe a leader has to be a student. In general it is hard for a leader to be around enough other
leaders to pick this up just through discussion, so I think a leader has to be a reader and a learner.
Furthermore, I can’t see someone leading in a field they know nothing about.

Confidence and Humility Combined

While one can have a great vision and good ideas for change, and even passion for it, if one isn’t
confident, then action will not occur. Without action, there is no change. Yet, paradoxically, a leader

4
needs to have humility. No matter how creative and bright one is, often the best ideas and thinking are
going to come from someone else. A leader needs to be able to identify that, have good people around
who have these ideas. This takes humility, or at least lack of egocentricity. The leader is focused on the
ends and doesn’t have to see herself always as the conduit or creator of the strategy to get to that end.

Communicator
None of the above assets will work for a leader if she can’t speak or write in a way to convince others
that they should follow along, join the team, get on board. All the above gets to the old adage that a
leader knows how to do the right thing and a manager knows how to do things right. But a leader has to
be a manager, too. I don’t think these skills and abilities can be separated out very easily. Both need to
be in the mix.

Thus a leader has to be some of the following, too:

Planner/Organizer
Someone who can see what needs to be done and help the team plan and organize the getting it done.
Management is getting things done through people. While a writer or other visionary person may be
very influential, even seminal for the cause of change, this is not quite my definition of a leader. A leader
means to me, someone who is taking action, trying to get others to do something they want to see
done.

Interpersonal Skills
Leaders must have the ability to act in an interpersonally competent manner, yet they also need to learn
the techniques of good listening, honest and open communication, delegating, conflict resolution skills,
etc., to actually get work done and keep the whole movement/organization/project together.

Other Business Skills

While in some arenas you may be able to get by with only some of these skills or none of them (if you
can hire good enough people to do it for you), generally speaking you must have at least some skills in
financial management, human resources, information management, sales, marketing, etc

Adopting a Contingency Approach to Leadership

Implied in the contingency approach to leadership is the need for leaders to be flexible in their
choice of leadership style based on the situation. Thus, if the leader's initial attempt to influence a
group is unsuccessful, one suggested course of action available to the leader is to adopt an
alternative style of leadership more compatible with elements of the situation. This article
examines the likelihood that awareness by the leader that the present leadership style "is not
working" is sufficient to result in the leader's changing his or her style. It is contended that once
a leader encounters resistance to his or her attempts to influence a group, a more likely response
of many leaders is to rely even further on the approach to leadership that he or she is most

5
comfortable with. Leadership style(s) used by an organizational behavior (OB) instructor in
relating to several OB classes that varied greatly in terms of performance and classroom
participation are examined.

The contingency approach to management is based on the idea that there is no one best way to
manage and that to be effective, planning, organizing, leading, and controlling must be tailored
to the particular circumstances faced by an organization. Managers have always asked questions
such as "What is the right thing to do? Should we have a mechanistic or an organic structure? A
functional or divisional structure? Wide or narrow spans of management? Tall or flat
organizational structures? Simple or complex control and coordination mechanisms? Should we
be centralized or decentralized? Should we use task or people oriented leadership styles? What
motivational approaches and incentive programs should we use?" The contingency approach to
management (also called the situational approach) assumes that there is no universal answer to
such questions because organizations, people, and situations vary and change over time. Thus,
the right thing to do depends on a complex variety of critical environmental and internal
contingencies.

Dissatisfaction with trait-based theories of leadership effectiveness led to the development of

contingency leadership theories. Fred Fiedler, in the 1960s and 1970s, was an early pioneer in
this area. Various aspects of the situation have been identified as impacting the effectiveness of
different leadership styles. For example, Fiedler suggests that the degree to which subordinates
like or trust the leader, the degree to which the task is structured, and the formal authority
possessed by the leader are key determinants of the leadership situation. Task-oriented or
relationship oriented leadership should would each work if they fit the characteristics of the
situation.

Other contingency leadership theories were developed as well. However, empirical research has
been mixed as to the validity of these theories.

TEAMS
A team comprises a group of people or animals linked in a common purpose. Teams are
especially appropriate for conducting tasks that are high in complexity and have many
interdependent subtasks.

A group in itself does not necessarily constitute a team. Teams normally have members with
complementary skills and generate synergy through a coordinated effort which allows each
member to maximise his or her strengths and minimise his or her weaknesses. Team members
need to learn how to help one another, help other team members realze their true potential, and
create an environment that allows everyone to go beyond their limitations.

6
Types of teams
Self-managed teams

Normally, a manager acts as the team leader and is responsible for defining the goals, methods,
and functioning of the team. However, inter-dependencies and conflicts between different parts
of an organisation may not be best addressed by hierarchical models of control. Self-managed
teams use clear boundaries to create the freedom and responsibility to accomplish tasks in an
efficient manner.

The main idea of the self-managed team is that the leader does not operate with positional
authority. In a traditional management role, the manager is responsible for providing instruction,
conducting communication, developing plans, giving orders, and disciplining and rewarding
employees, and making decisions by virtue of his or her position. In this organisational model,
the manager delegates specific responsibility and decision-making authority to the team itself, in
the hope that the group will make better decisions than any individual. Neither a manager nor the
team leader make independent decisions in the delegated responsibility area. Decisions are
typically made by consensus in successful self-managed teams, by voting in very large or formal
teams, and by hectoring and bullying in unsuccessful teams. The team as a whole is accountable
for the outcome of its decisions and actions.

Self-managed teams operate in many organisations to manage complex projects involving

research, design, process improvement, and even systemic issue resolution, particularly for
cross-department projects involving people of similar seniority levels. While the internal
leadership style in a self-managed team is distinct from traditional leadership and operates to
neutralise the issues often associated with traditional leadership models, a self-managed team
still needs support from senior management to operate well.

Project teams

A team used only for a defined period of time and for a separate, concretely definable purpose,
often becomes known as a project team. Managers commonly label groups of people as a
"team" based on having a common function. Members of these teams might belong to different
groups, but receive assignment to activities for the same project, thereby allowing outsiders to
view them as a single unit. In this way, setting up a team allegedly facilitates the creation,
tracking and assignment of a group of people based on the project in hand. The use of the "team"
label in this instance often has no relationship to whether the employees are working as a team.

Virtual teams

Developments in communications technologies have seen the emergence of the virtual work
team. A virtual team is a group of people who work interdependently and with shared purpose
across space, time, and organisation boundaries using technology to communicate and
collaborate. Virtual team members can be located across a country or across the world, rarely
meet face-to-face, and include members from different cultures. Ale Ebrahim, N., Ahmed, S. &
Taha, Z. in their recent (2009) literature review paper, added two key issues to definition of a

7
virtual team “as small temporary groups of geographically, organizationally and/ or time
dispersed knowledge workers who coordinate their work predominantly with electronic
information and communication technologies in order to accomplish one or more organization
tasks”. Many virtual teams are cross-functional and emphasis solving customer problems or
generating new work processes.

Interdisciplinary and multidisciplinary teams

Teams, such as in medical fields, may be interdisciplinary or multidisciplinary. Multidisciplinary

teams involve several professionals who independently treat various issues a patient may have,
focusing on the issues in which they specialise. The problems that are being treated may or may
not relate to other issues being addressed by individual team members. Interdisciplinary team
approach involves all members of the team working together towards the same goal. In an
interdisciplinary team approach, there can often be role blending by members of the core team,
who may take on tasks usually filled by other team members.

Other Types of Teams

1. Task Force - a temporary team assembled to investigate a specific issue or problem.

2. Problem Solving Team - a temporary team assembled to solve a specific problem.

3. Product Design Team - a temporary team assembled to design a new product or service.

4. Committee - a temporary or permanent group of people assembled to act upon some matter.

5. Work Group - a permanent group of workers who receive direction from a designated leader.

6. Work Team (also called Self-Directed Work Team or Self-Managed Work Team) - an ongoing group of
workers who share a common mission who collectively manage their own affairs within predetermined
boundaries.

7. Quality Circle (today also under various other names) - a group of workers from the same functional
area who meet regularly to uncover and solve work-related problems and seek work improvement
opportunities.

Characteristics of Effective Teams

1. There is a clear unity of purpose.
There was free discussion of the objectives until members could commit themselves to them; the
objectives are meaningful to each group member.

2. The group is self-conscious about its own operations.

8
The group has taken time to explicitly discuss group process -- how the group will function to
achieve its objectives. The group has a clear, explicit, and mutually agreed-upon approach:
mechanics, norms, expectations, rules, etc. Frequently, it will stop to examined how well it is
doing or what may be interfering with its operation. Whatever the problem may be, it gets open
discussion and a solution found.

3. The group has set clear and demanding performance goals

for itself and has translated these performance goals into well-defined concrete milestones
against which it measures itself. The group defines and achieves a continuous series of "small
wins" along the way to larger goals.

4. The atmosphere tends to be informal, comfortable, relaxed.

There are no obvious tensions, a working atmosphere in which people are involved and
interested.

5. There is a lot of discussion in which virtually everyone participates,

but it remains pertinent to the purpose of the group. If discussion gets off track, someone will
bring it back in short order. The members listen to each other. Every idea is given a hearing.
People are not afraid of being foolish by putting forth a creative thought even if it seems
extreme.

6. People are free in expressing their feelings as well as their ideas.

7. There is disagreement and this is viewed as good.

Disagreements are not suppressed or overridden by premature group action. The reasons are
carefully examined, and the group seeks to resolve them rather than dominate the dissenter.
Dissenters are not trying to dominate the group; they have a genuine difference of opinion. If
there are basic disagreements that cannot be resolved, the group figures out a way to live with
them without letting them block its efforts.

8. Most decisions are made at a point where there is general agreement.

However, those who disagree with the general agreement of the group do not keep their
opposition private and let an apparent consensus mask their disagreement. The group does not
accept a simple majority as a proper basis for action.

9. Each individual carries his or her own weight,

meeting or exceeding the expectations of other group members. Each individual is respectful of
the mechanics of the group: arriving on time, coming to meetings prepared, completing agreed
upon tasks on time, etc. When action is taken, clears assignments are made (who-what-when)
and willingly accepted and completed by each group member.

10. Criticism is frequent, frank and relatively comfortable.

The criticism has a constructive flavor -- oriented toward removing an obstacle that faces the
group.

9
11. The leadership of the group shifts from time to time.
The issue is not who controls, but how to get the job done.

OR THIS SET TOO

1. Care for each other

The teams that are most effective care about each other. They have a genuine interest in each
other and their success and fulfilment. Think about times when things were going really well in a
group. More than likely one of the most powerful things that was pulling the team together was
genuine interest in each other.

2. Open and truthful

Openness and truthfulness is the second key characteristic of effective teams. When teams are
open and truthful, they step forward, say things that need to be said, all in the interest of helping
the team to get results.

3. High levels of trust

Teams that are looking over their shoulder all of the time, who worry about what is being said in
smaller groups, who don't believe they can rely on others and are looking to points score will not
create high levels of trust. If there are low levels of trust, it is extremely difficult to excel as a
team. Why? You don't have a team, just a group of individuals who are thrown together to
achieve something.

4. Consensus decisions

If you are someone who looks at decisions through a lens of getting what you want and this is
replicated across a team, how effective do you think that team would be? Consensus decision
making is not about avoid taking decisions or watering down decisions. It is about looking for
the best win-win outcome for the team.

5. Commitment

The teams that are effective are committed to getting the results they desire. They know where
they are heading, are highly motivated and persistent even when setbacks arise. Commitment in
many ways is about doing what it takes to get the result you want. Think of a team that achieved
results and ask yourself what qualities they drew on to get the great results they got.

6. Address conflict

10
Sometimes people wrongly believe that in effective teams there is no conflict. The difference
between those teams that excel and those that struggle is that conflict is addressed. Rather than
seeing it as something negative, teams recognise it as healthy and to be worked through in order
to get the desired results.

7. Real listening

Listening is key to effective communication and effective teams know that it is important to
really listen and understand. Real listening is about focusing attention on the communicator
rather than your own personal agenda. Teams who only master this will go a long way to being
more effective.

8. Express feelings

We are often told to keep emotions and feelings out of the work place. Yet in truth, if teams want
to be effective they need to create a safe and courageous space for feelings to be expressed.
Think about an investment decision. Accounting, marketing, operations, production, distribution
and human resources will feel differently about the decision. It is important that these feelings
can be expressed without fear or ridicule.

COMMUNICATION IN BUSINESS ORGANISATIONS

Directions of communication in a business
Communication flows in three main directions in a business:

(1) Vertical Communication

E.g. from managers to sub-ordinates; from shop floor workers to supervisors; from the Chief
Executive to all other management and employees.

Vertical communication flows are mainly used for reporting information (e.g. results, plans) and
obtaining feedback (e.g. an employee survey summarised for the Board of Directors

(2) Horizontal Communication

This is between people of the same "level" in a business - usually in the same department, but
sometimes communication between departments. This is sometimes known as "peer
communication". It is normally used to co-ordinate work. E.g. sales managers for different
regions circulate details of potential customers to each other and allocate based on the customer
location; or accounting staff in different departments share information to help prepare the
annual budget on a consistent basis.

11
(3) Diagonal Communication

Less common; this involves interdepartmental communication by people at different levels. A

good example would be a project team drawn from different grades and departments.

The communication process involves seven key elements as illustrated in the diagram below.

Communication - barriers
Inevitably, most businesses (perhaps all) suffer from failures in communication. Poor businesses
suffer from persistently poor communications.

Perhaps the best way to think about the way in which communication can go wrong is to think
about what good communication would be like:

- It would use appropriate language (e.g. no poor use of jargon; written so that the intended
recipient can understand)

- It would go only to who should receive it - not everyone

- It would use the right medium to communicate the information

- The information would get to the recipient in good time for it to be used

Taking the above list, it easy to produce a list of how communications go wrong:

12
- Information is omitted or distorted by the sender

- Information is misunderstood due to the use of inappropriate jargon or lack of clarity

- Information is presented using an inappropriate medium (e.g. via email rather than in a proper
report, or via telephone when face-to-face is better)

- Information arrives too late, or incomplete

Barriers to good communication

Research suggests that, amongst the many reasons why information fails to be communicated,
the following are the main barriers:

- Different status of the sender and the receiver (e.g. a senior manager sends a memo to a
production supervisor - who is likely to pay close attention to the message. The same
information, conveyed in the opposite direction might not get the attention it deserves)

- Use of jargon - employees who are "specialists" may fall for the trap of using specialist
language for a non-specialist audience (e.g. the IT technician who cannot tries to explain how
users should log onto a network, in language that sounds foreign to most users of the network)

- Selective reporting - where the reporter gives the recipient incorrect or incomplete information

- Poor timing - information that is not immediately relevant (e.g. notice of some deadline that
seems a long way off) is not always actioned straightaway

- Conflict - where the communicator and recipient are in conflict; information tends to be
ignored or distorted

Environmental issues: If the environment that the transmitter or receiver are in, is noisy and full
of sound, the sounds may prevent the message being fully understood. Background noise is often
created by colleagues or machinery.

Channel issues: If the channel used to transfer the information is poor it may prevent all or some
of the information being transferred. Examples include a faulty fax machine, a crackling phone,
handwriting that cannot be read or in the case of oral messages incorrect facial gestures.

Receivers Attitude and behaviour: If the receiver(s) is not interested in the message (or unable
to give their full attention to decoding) this may reduce the amount of information received or
the accuracy of the information transmitted to them. Similarly the receiver(s) may misinterpret
the message by "jumping to conclusions" or reading the message in a manner that suits their own
interests/objectives and distort the true meaning of the message.

13
Positive Steps for Managing Conflict
 Conflict is bad and terrible things will occur if differences in opinion are aired.
 Conflict will rip apart the team or its esprit de corps.
 Other employees will be mad at him.
 He would be calling too much attention to himself by making a big deal out of the
situation.
 It's better not to engage in conflict; harmony must prevail at all costs.
 The parties will never get over those negative feelings.
 The issue will cause a chain reaction that will halt or delay productivity and involve other
people.

So what positive steps can leaders take to minimize the negative aspects of conflict?

1. Realize that conflict is natural and happens all the time.

2. Stress the positive aspects of conflict; just because tension arises, the world is not going
to collapse. In fact, if handled well, conflict often leads to innovation.
3. Realize that conflict can be handled in a positive way that leads to personal and
professional growth, development and productivity.
4. Encourage others to bring up conflict and differences. Allowing them to fester inevitably
encourages them to erupt later, usually at a most inopportune time.
5. Identify the root cause(s) of the conflict. You can't begin to unravel the potential
negativity in conflict and look toward progress until you determine the source of the
issue.
6. Look at the issue from all sides. Inspect the positive and negative factors that each party
sees to fully comprehend what is at stake.
7. Devise a complete list of actions to address the issue; ensure that each party believes that
he/she has had input in the final product or decision.
8. Decide on the step that best addresses and resolves the issue. Again, all parties need to
see that they have had input into this step.
9. Agree on whatever next steps are necessary to implement the mutually agreed-upon
action.
10. Review the process that you used to arrive at the final decision, hoping to implement a
similar successful plan when negative conflict next arises.

An effective leader is willing to address spoken and unspoken negative tension and helps
transform it into positive, productive tension that leads to increased understanding of the issues,
the parties involved and the final outcome.

Managerial Accountability and Authority

14
Definations
Delegation (also called deputation) is the assignment of authority and responsibility to another person
(normally from a manager to a subordinate) to carry out specific activities. However the person who
delegated the work remains accountable for the outcome of the delegated work.

3. Management: Sharing or transfer of authority and the associated responsibility, from an employer or
superior (who has the right to delegate) to an employee or subordinate.

The steps of successful delegation

1 Define the task

Confirm in your own mind that the task is suitable to be delegated. Does it meet the criteria for
delegating?

2 Select the individual or team

What are your reasons for delegating to this person or team? What are they going to get out of it?
What are you going to get out of it?

3 Assess ability and training needs

Is the other person or team of people capable of doing the task? Do they understand what needs
to be done. If not, you can't delegate.

4 Explain the reasons

You must explain why the job or responsibility is being delegated. And why to that person or
people? What is its importance and relevance? Where does it fit in the overall scheme of things?

5 State required results

What must be achieved? Clarify understanding by getting feedback from the other person. How
will the task be measured? Make sure they know how you intend to decide that the job is being
successfully done.

6 Consider resources required

Discuss and agree what is required to get the job done. Consider people, location, premises,
equipment, money, materials, other related activities and services.

15
7 Agree deadlines

When must the job be finished? Or if an ongoing duty, when are the review dates? When are the
reports due? And if the task is complex and has parts or stages, what are the priorities?

At this point you may need to confirm understanding with the other person of the previous
points, getting ideas and interpretation. As well as showing you that the job can be done, this
helps to reinforce commitment.

Methods of checking and controlling must be agreed with the other person. Failing to agree this
in advance will cause this monitoring to seem like interference or lack of trust.

8 Support and communicate

Think about who else needs to know what's going on, and inform them. Involve the other person
in considering this so they can see beyond the issue at hand. Do not leave the person to inform
your own peers of their new responsibility. Warn the person about any awkward matters of
politics or protocol. Inform your own boss if the task is important, and of sufficient profile.

9 Feedback on results

It is essential to let the person know how they are doing, and whether they have achieved their
aims. If not, you must review with them why things did not go to plan, and deal with the
problems. You must absorb the consequences of failure, and pass on the credit for success.

Characteristics of Effective Delegators

Effective delegation requires not only a structured process, but also the proper attitude on the part of the
manager. Some characteristics of an effective delegator are described below.

 Develops trusting relationships with employees.

 Is able to let go of detail work.
 Can let others make decisions.
 Focuses on desired results, not methods.
 Is open to new ideas and approaches.
 Helps people learn from their mistakes.
 Feels rewarded by the success of others.

Managerial Accountability and Authority

16
In leadership roles, accountability is the acknowledgment and assumption of
responsibility for actions, products, decisions, and policies including the
administration, governance, and implementation within the scope of the role
or employment position and encompassing the obligation to report, explain
and be answerable for resulting consequences.

Types of accountability

Political accountability

Political accountability is the accountability of the government, civil servants and politicians to
the public and to legislative bodies such as a congress or a parliament.

In parliamentary systems, the government relies on the support or parliament, which gives parliament
power to hold the government to account. For example, some parliaments can pass a vote of no
confidence in the government.

Ethical accountability

Ethical accountability is the practice of improving overall personal and organizational

performance by developing and promoting responsible tools and professional expertise, and by
advocating an effective enabling environment for people and organizations to embrace a culture
of sustainable development. Ethical accountability may include the individual, as well as small
and large businesses, not-for-profit organizations, research institutions and academics, and
government. One scholarly paper has posited that "it is unethical to plan an action for social
change without excavating the knowledge and wisdom of the people who are responsible for
implementing the plans of action and the people whose lives will be affected."

Administrative accountability

Internal rules and norms as well as some independent commission are mechanisms to hold civil
servant within the administration of government accountable. Within department or ministry,
firstly, behavior is bounded by rules and regulations; secondly, civil servants are subordinates in
a hierarchy and accountable to superiors. Nonetheless, there are independent “watchdog” units to
scrutinize and hold departments accountable; legitimacy of these commissions is built upon their
independence, as it avoids any conflicts of interest. Apart from internal checks, some
“watchdog” units accept complaints from citizens, bridging government and society to hold civil
servants accountable to citizens, but not merely governmental departments.

17
Market accountability

Under voices for decentralization and privatization of the government, services provided are
nowadays more “customer-driven” and should aim to provide convenience and various choices
to citizens; with this perspective, there are comparisons and competition between public and
private services and this, ideally, improves quality of service. As mentioned by Bruce Stone, the
standard of assessment for accountability is therefore “responsiveness of service providers to a
body of ‘sovereign’ customers and produce quality service. Outsourcing service is one means to
adopt market accountability. Government can choose among a shortlist of companies for
outsourced service; within the contracting period, government can hold the company by
rewriting contracts or by choosing another company.

Responsibility

Definition

Duty or obligation to satisfactorily perform or complete a task (assigned by someone, or created by one's own
promise or circumstances) that one must fulfill, and which has a consequent penalty for failure.

Setting Objectives
Objectives set out what the business is trying to achieve.

Objectives can be set at two levels:

(1) Corporate level

These are objectives that concern the business or organisation as a whole

Examples of “corporate objectives might include:

• We aim for a return on investment of at least 15%
• We aim to achieve an operating profit of over £10 million on sales of at least £100 million
• We aim to increase earnings per share by at least 10% every year for the foreseeable future

(2) Functional level

e.g. specific objectives for marketing activities

Examples of functional marketing objectives” might include:

• We aim to build customer database of at least 250,000 households within the next 12 months

18
• We aim to achieve a market share of 10%
• We aim to achieve 75% customer awareness of our brand in our target markets

Both corporate and functional objectives need to conform to the commonly used SMART
criteria.

The SMART criteria (an important concept which you should try to remember and apply in
exams) are summarized below:

Specific - the objective should state exactly what is to be achieved.

Measurable - an objective should be capable of measurement – so that it is possible to determine

whether (or how far) it has been achieved

Achievable - the objective should be realistic given the circumstances in which it is set and the
resources available to the business.

Relevant - objectives should be relevant to the people responsible for achieving them

Time Bound - objectives should be set with a time-frame in mind. These deadlines also need to
be realistic.

Management by objectives
Management by Objectives (MBO) is a process of defining objectives within an organization
so that management and employees agree to the objectives and understand what they are in the
organization.

The term "management by objectives" was first popularized by Peter Drucker in his 1954 book
'The Practice of Management'.[1]

The essence of MBO is participative goal setting, choosing course of actions and decision
making. An important part of the MBO is the measurement and the comparison of the
employee’s actual performance with the standards set. Ideally, when employees themselves have
been involved with the goal setting and choosing the course of action to be followed by them,
they are more likely to fulfill their responsibilities.

Unique features and advantages of the MBO process

The basic principle behind Management by Objectives (MBO) is for employees to have a clear
understanding of the roles and responsibilities expected of them. They can then understand how
their activities relate to the achievement of the organization's goal. MBO also places importance
on fulfilling the personal goals of each employee.

19
Some of the important features and advantages of MBO are:

1. Motivation – Involving employees in the whole process of goal setting and increasing employee
empowerment. This increases employee job satisfaction and commitment.
2. Better communication and Coordination – Frequent reviews and interactions between superiors
and subordinates helps to maintain harmonious relationships within the organization and also
to solve many problems.
3. Clarity of goals
4. Subordinates tend to have a higher commitment to objectives they set for themselves than
those imposed on them by another person.
5. Managers can ensure that objectives of the subordinates are linked to the organization's
objectives.

Limitations

There are several limitations to the assumptive base underlying the impact of managing by
objectives, including:

1. It over-emphasizes the setting of goals over the working of a plan as a driver of outcomes.

2. It underemphasizes the importance of the environment or context in which the goals are set.
That context includes everything from the availability and quality of resources, to relative buy-in
by leadership and stake-holders. As an example of the influence of management buy-in as a
contextual influencer, in a 1991 comprehensive review of thirty years of research on the impact
of Management by Objectives, Robert Rodgers and John Hunter concluded that companies
whose CEOs demonstrated high commitment to MBO showed, on average, a 56% gain in
productivity. Companies with CEOs who showed low commitment only saw a 6% gain in
productivity.

3. Companies evaluated their employees by comparing them with the "ideal" employee. Trait
appraisal only looks at what employees should be, not at what they should do.

When this approach is not properly set, agreed and managed by organizations, self-centered
employees might be prone to distort results, falsely representing achievement of targets that were
set in a short-term, narrow fashion. In this case, managing by objectives would be
counterproductive.

20
21
22