Wassmiah Is A Leader In A Local Hospital And Works Well

Wassmiah Is A Leader In A Local Hospital And Works Well In The Environ

Wassmiah is a leader in a local hospital and works well in the environment. The hospital’s environment is characterized by well-defined individual roles where each employee knows what is expected of him or her. Employee conflicts are minimized as everyone understands his or her responsibility, and the coordination of all activities leads to goal attainment. There is no duplication of work. Wassmiah encourages people to perform well and rewards positive behavior to boost productivity.

Most goals Wassmiah sets are short-term, making them easier to fulfill, less intimidating to achieve, and as a result, employees are interested in obtaining the various rewards. When a problem arises, Wassmiah directs the employees in what to do and is quick to point out if the employee does not deliver results. However, Wassmiah suspects that employees are not working when there is no supervision. What style of leadership is most likely described in this case and why have you reached that conclusion? What are the advantages of this type of leadership and what examples from the case support your position? What are the disadvantages of this type of leadership and what examples from the case support your position? What are the implications for employee motivation with this type of leadership? What other styles of leadership might be complementary to that described in the case and why?

Paper For Above instruction

Based on the description provided, the leadership style most likely depicted in this case is transactional leadership. Transactional leadership is characterized by a focus on clear structure, defined roles, and immediate performance rewards, which aligns with Wassmiah’s environment where employees have well-understood responsibilities, short-term goals, and a reward system to motivate performance. Additionally, Wassmiah’s approach to supervising employees directly, especially when problems occur, and emphasizing results reflects core transactional leadership principles.

One of the key features supporting this conclusion is Wassmiah’s reliance on supervision and immediate feedback, which is a hallmark of transactional leadership. This style often emphasizes monitoring performance and correcting deviations promptly, as seen in Wassmiah’s quick responses when employees do not deliver results. Furthermore, the focus on rewards for positive behavior aligns with transactional leadership’s emphasis on contingent rewards, where performance is directly linked to tangible incentives. This approach tends to produce high levels of task completion and efficiency, especially in environments where roles and expectations are well defined, as in the hospital setting described.

The advantages of transactional leadership include clarity of expectations, straightforward performance management, and high productivity for routine tasks. It fosters a structured work environment in which employees understand precisely what is expected and what they will receive in return for achieving targets. In this case, Wassmiah’s short-term goal orientation and reward system likely motivate employees to perform efficiently, minimizing conflicts and ensuring goal congruence. The case supports this with examples of well-defined roles, minimal conflict, and reward-driven motivation that enhance productivity.

However, there are also notable disadvantages associated with transactional leadership. One significant limitation is its tendency to stifle creativity and innovation, as employees are primarily motivated by rewards for specific tasks rather than intrinsic motivation or broader organizational goals. In the case, this could mean that employees might only perform tasks when closely supervised, potentially lowering morale and engagement when supervision is absent. The suspicion that employees are not working without supervision illustrates this concern, as reliance solely on oversight and external rewards may lead to a lack of initiative or autonomous problem-solving among staff.

The implications for employee motivation under transactional leadership are mixed. While extrinsic motivators like rewards and clear performance guidelines can boost short-term productivity, they may not foster long-term engagement or loyalty. Employees may become motivated solely by the prospect of rewards, which can diminish intrinsic motivation and reduce their sense of ownership or commitment to the organization. If employees perceive that their efforts are closely monitored and only rewarded temporarily, their motivation could decrease once external incentives are removed or diminished.

To address these drawbacks and enhance motivation, integrating other leadership styles could be beneficial. Transformational leadership, which emphasizes inspiring employees and fostering intrinsic motivation, could complement transactional practices by encouraging innovation, commitment, and personal development. For example, transformational leaders motivate employees to go beyond routine tasks and develop a shared vision, which can enhance job satisfaction and loyalty. Co-leadership styles like participative or servant leadership could also foster more autonomous and engaged employees, reducing reliance on supervision and rewards alone.

In conclusion, Wassmiah’s leadership style primarily appears to be transactional, characterized by a focus on structure, supervision, and extrinsic rewards. While this style offers advantages such as clarity, efficiency, and goal-oriented performance, it also presents disadvantages including limited motivation beyond external rewards and potential stagnation in creativity. Combining transactional leadership with transformative or participative approaches can lead to a more motivated, innovative, and committed workforce, ultimately enhancing organizational effectiveness in the hospital environment.

References

• Burns, J. M. (1978). Leadership. Harper & Row.
• Bass, B. M. (1985). Leadership and Performance Beyond Expectations. Free Press.
• Northouse, P. G. (2018). Leadership: Theory and Practice (8th ed.). Sage Publications.
• Robinson, S. P., & Judge, T. A. (2019). Organizational Behavior. Pearson.
• Yukl, G. (2013). Leadership in Organizations (8th ed.). Pearson.
• Antonakis, J., & House, R. J. (2014). Instrumental Leadership: Measurement and Extension of Transformational–Transactional Leadership Theory. The Leadership Quarterly, 25(4), 543-563.
• Graen, G. B., & Uhl-Bien, M. (1995). Relationship-Based Approach to Leadership: Development of Leader-Member Exchange (LMX) Theory of Leadership. The Leadership Quarterly, 6(2), 219-247.
• Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., & Bommer, W. H. (1996). Transformational Leadership and Its Consequences for Group and Organizational Performance. Journal of Management, 22(2), 259-298.
• Bass, B. M., & Avolio, B. J. (1994). Improving Organizational Effectiveness Through Transformational Leadership. Sage Publications.
• Gagné, M., & Deci, E. L. (2005). Self-Determination Theory and Work Motivation. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 26(4), 331–362.