Styles Of Leadership Differ From One Manager To Another

Styles of leadership differ from one manager to another.

Discuss various types of leadership styles with reference to the case. a. Romantic b. Heroic 2. Which style do you consider Kolab is adopting and why? a. Heroic 3. How did it differ from the style adopted by Hanh and how is it affecting employees’ productivity and motivation? Support your answer with evidence from the case.

Paper For Above instruction

Leadership styles are diverse in their approaches and impacts within organizational settings, shaping how managers guide, influence, and motivate their teams. In the context of the case involving Kolab and the International Education Center (IEC), understanding the various leadership styles is crucial to analyzing her current approach and contrasting it with her predecessor, Hanh. Two prominent leadership styles relevant to this scenario are the romantic and heroic styles.

Romantic Leadership Style is characterized by a leader who inspires and uplifts followers through emotional appeal, charm, and a shared vision. Romantic leaders often emphasize enthusiasm, empathy, and a personal connection to motivate their employees. They create a narrative of passion and purpose, fostering a sense of belonging and emotional commitment among staff. In the case, this style might resemble Hanh’s leadership, who built strong relationships and was effective at fostering camaraderie within the organization. Her approachable and personable manner likely made team members feel valued and connected, thus enhancing motivation and productivity. The romantic style relies heavily on the leader’s charisma and ability to inspire through emotional bonds.

Heroic Leadership Style involves a leader positioning themselves as a change agent and a transformative figure who drives organizational success through their vision, determination, and assertiveness. Heroic leaders often undertake bold initiatives, challenge existing paradigms, and are perceived as catalysts for change. They are typically proactive, confident, and willing to assume responsibility for major organizational shifts. In the case, Kolab’s behaviors—her goal-oriented approach, push for organizational expansion, and her determination to change the organizational culture—align with the heroic style. She appears to see herself as a transformative figure, aiming to revamp the IEC’s culture and drive the organization toward new strategic objectives.

Which style do you consider Kolab is adopting and why?

Kolab is adopting a heroic leadership style. Her actions demonstrate a focus on instigating change and steering the organization toward new goals. Her determination to overhaul the organizational culture and her assertiveness in pushing employees—despite their disengagement—are indicative of a heroic approach. She perceives herself as a catalyst for transformation, emphasizing strategic realignment and organizational growth. Her impatience with staff attitudes and her desire to instill a new culture further support the view that she sees herself as a transformative leader, willing to challenge existing norms to accomplish her vision.

How did it differ from the style adopted by Hanh and how is it affecting employees’ productivity and motivation?

The leadership style of Hanh was more aligned with the romantic style, characterized by relationship building and emotional connection. Her effectiveness in fostering camaraderie and personal relationships contributed to a positive work environment, which supported high levels of motivation and productivity. In contrast, Kolab’s heroic style, with its focus on change and achievement, appears to have created a disconnect. Employees now express sentiments of being overworked, impersonal treatment, and a loss of camaraderie—indicative of decreased motivation.

This shift in leadership approach has negatively impacted employee productivity and morale. The case cites employees arriving late to meetings, disengagement during meetings, and comments about missing personal interactions with Hanh. Such behaviors suggest that Kolab’s leadership, while strategic and goal-driven, may lack the relational and motivational elements essential for maintaining employee engagement. The authoritative and change-oriented nature of her leadership potentially alienates staff who thrive on personal connections, leading to decreased motivation and productivity.

References

• Northouse, P. G. (2018). Leadership: Theory and Practice (8th ed.). Sage Publications.
• Bass, B. M., & Bass, R. (2008). The Bass Handbook of Leadership: Theory, Research, and Managerial Applications. Free Press.
• Yukl, G. (2012). Leadership in Organizations (8th ed.). Pearson Education.
• Goleman, D. (2000). Leadership That Gets Results. Harvard Business Review, 78(2), 78-90.
• Robinson, S. P., & Judge, T. A. (2019). Organizational Behavior (18th ed.). Pearson.
• Kouzes, J. M., & Posner, B. Z. (2017). The Leadership Challenge: How to Make Extraordinary Things Happen in Organizations. Jossey-Bass.
• Hersey, P., & Blanchard, K. H. (1982). Management of Organizational Behavior: Utilizing Human Resources. Prentice-Hall.
• Burns, J. M. (1978). Leadership. Harper & Row.
• Antonakis, J., & Day, D. V. (2017). The Nature of Leadership. Sage Publications.
• Yukl, G. (2010). Leadership in Organizations (7th ed.). Pearson Education.