a contrast of the leadership style of two modern leaders

7/29/2019 A Contrast of the Leadership Style of Two Modern Leaders

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/a-contrast-of-the-leadership-style-of-two-modern-leaders 1/11

Research Paper

A contrastof the leadershipstyle of two modernleadersframedby theory governingthe field.

"The task of the leader is to get his people from where they are to where they have not

been." ~ Henry Kissinger

The leadership style used in an organization undoubtably has an effect on work

performance and in the long run the success of the enterprise. Effective leadership can be

a fundamental tool in maximising company performance and has led to an abundance of

research and discussion on the topic. This essay briefly outlines the types of leadership

styles and the theory and studies behind these classifications. With these theorems in

mind, it will then examine the leadership styles of two prominent businessmen, clear

leaders in their respective fields who have employed vastly different methods to achieve

success. To conclude, this essay will question the impact of leadership style and debate its

role in employee performance.

At the beginning of the twentieth century, achieving goals was seen as the ultimate

measure of success, leading to the development of classical theories such as Taylor’s

theory of Scientific Management and Ford’s introduction of the Assembly line. Later, this

approach was challenged by the emergence of Mayo’s Hawthorne Studies, which

highlighted the importance of social factors in addition to economic motivators. The

“Human Relations Movement” emerged, resulting in a shift of focus to social processes

and consequently the expansion of beliefs and theories related to effective leadership. The

development of assessment methods later emerged, including the “managerial grid” which

assigned leaders levels of task and poeple concern (Blake and Mouton, 1964, 1978 &



Research Paper

1985). The 5 central styles are summarized in Appendix 1. Initially, autocratic leadership

appeared to be effective in boosting performance . Before Ford’s “Assembly Line” was

introduced the factory was producing two hundred cars per day at a rate of ten days per

car. The introduction of Fordism entailed ordering employees when and how to complete

tasks. Consequently, productivity increased leading to a total rise of two thousand and five

hundred cars per day (Roberts, A., 2009). In this case, autocratic leadership was

indisputably effective in reaching, and even exceeding, performance targets. But according

to Blake, R.R. and Mouton, J.S. (1975), the effectiveness of authority has diminished. As

the human relations movement emerged, so did new preferential leadership styles. "today,

in an environment of vastly improved education... many are rejecting traditional authority

and trying to set up and act upon their own. Results from Blake and Mouton's Managerial

Grid found that "most respondents score towards the 5, 5 middle-of-the-road style". This

infers that most common leadership styles consist of a balance between people and task

concern. . "The 9, 9 approach is acknowledged by managers as the soundest way to

achieve excellence. This conclusion has been verified from studies throughout the U.S.

and around the world." (Blake & Mouton, 1975).

Berkowitz (1954) summarised leadership styles into four main categories: autocratic,

laissez-faire, democratic and human relations. An autocratic (or directive) leader believes

in taking all the important decisions himself, deciding how the task will be done and by

whom. There is little input from subordinates and minimal scope for change once decisions

have been made- employees simply carry out the tasks assigned to them and any

subsequent changes in work schedule are decided solely by the leader. The laissez- faire

(or delegative) style encourages independence of followers and seldom contributes to the

methods of output- full freedom is given to subordinates in decision- making and how to



Research Paper

acccomplish the tasks. The leader places a great deal of faith in the capability of each

member of his team and is confident that they would achieve the outcomes successfully.

Democratic leaders fall into the sub-category of participative leaders who build consensus

through participation. The opinions of subordinates are taken into consideration before

arriving at a final decision. Finally, a human relations style is similar to the democratic

leader in stressing the importance of consulting those involved before making a decision.

This leadership styles works to create emotional bonds that encourage subordinates to

feel a part of the organization and fulfill tasks through a sense of desire to please.

To illustrate the practical application of the differing approaches, we examine the

cases of two successful entrepreneaurs whose differing styles can attest to how different

paths can lead to the same conclusion- success in business, profitability and a well

respected legacy.

Sir Richard Branson, born 18 July 1950, is an English business magnate, best known

as the founder and chairman of the Virgin Group which consists of more than four hundred

companies. His first business venture was a magazine called Student at the age of 16.[3]

In 1970, he set up an audio-record mail-order business. In 1972, he opened a chain of

record stores, Virgin Records, later known as Virgin Megastores. Branson's Virgin brand

grew rapidly during the 1980s, as he set up Virgin Atlantic Airways and expanded the

Virgin Records music label.

Branson is the 4th richest citizen of the United Kingdom, according to the Forbes 2012

list of billionaires, with an estimated net worth of US$4.2 billion.[Wikipedia ] Branson is an

inspirational figure, sometimes described as a “transformational leader”, with his trademark

maverick strategies and his emphasis on the Virgin Group as an organization driven by

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virgin_Megastores

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virgin_Atlantic_Airways

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virgin_Records

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_British_by_net_worth

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forbes

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forbes_list_of_billionaires

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virgin_Atlantic_Airways

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virgin_Records

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_British_by_net_worth

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forbes

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forbes_list_of_billionaires

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virgin_Megastores



Research Paper

informality and information. he has been vocal in his dislike for traditional hierarchical

employee structure in business, preferring instead to maintain open lines of

communication with his employees in the form of a bottom-heavy organizational structure

rather than a company strangled by top-level management. In an interview with Carmine

Gallo, a communications coach and author, he was quoted as saying “Too many people

are hiding in dark rooms flipping through too many words on big screens. There’s a reason

why I avoid boardrooms. I’d rather spend time with people ‘in the field,’ where eye contact,

genuine conviction and trustworthiness are in full evidence.” Branson represents a classic

participative leader, who draws knowledge and inspiration from those he leads. He is

reputed to carry a notebook with him when making tours of his premises to jot down

interesting ideas that employees might give to him. His style has earned him enormous

respect and loyalty among his subordinates, as they feel that their opinions matter too.

Inevitably, the leader is able to see a given situation from all directions before deciding on

a final course of action. because of the array of business ventures Branson is involved in,

this approach works well as he cannot know everything and he relies on his subordinate's

knowledge for taking decisions. The biggest advantage of this leadership and

management style is, that it helps in ascertaining and identifying future leaders among the

subordinates. Also, it keeps a team's spirit and morale high, as the team members feel

that their opinions are valued by their leader.

Branson’s approach is to find good people and listen to them. “Assemble a great

management team that has a vision, passion and a real sense of ownership,” he says.

“Look for leaders who listen - both to employees and customers,” adding further that what

results in brilliant customer service and innovative product development are leaders who

seek the feedback of their employees and customers. “When things start going wrong, it’s



Research Paper

often because staff members feel they are being ignored and good ideas are not bubbling

to the top,” he says, explaining that the best CEOs are not concerned with the size of their

office “or the thickness of the carpet”, and instead place greater emphasis on unearthing

what their employees are thinking and feeling. (Interview from http://www.smh.com.au /).

The design of his high performing organization tends to be of a more horizontal, not

hierarchical nature. The focus is on self-managed teams which helps develop a sense of

ownership and creates accountability. These organizations are also customer centered,

maximizing supplier and customer contact with everybody in the organization. As a

participative leader, although the final decision ultimately rests on Branson’s shoulders all

considerations and factors of a decision come from the collective mind of the group under

his leadership. He exhibits strong human relations traits, similar to that of an affiliative

leader, often appealing to the emotions and loyalty of his workers. Branson’s

recommendation for excellent leadership is exemplified by his branding and the

experience people have when interacting with his staff. He was quoted as saying “Find the

fun in your business. Try to ensure that both your staff and customers feel a real sense of

warmth and affection.” He advises leaders that for employees to treat clients in a heartfelt

and attentive way, they need to love their work and be proud of the company. “So look for

people who show genuine enthusiasm and character and try to manage them that way.” In

other aspects, he embodies a coaching leadership style, striving to develop people for the

future. “Fostering employee development through praise and recognition starts at the top,”

Branson says. “It helps stamp out the fear of failure that can stunt a business, particularly

in its early days. When mistakes inevitably happen, take the position that you have to learn

from them. Try not to dwell on what went wrong. It’s almost always better not to go over

the obvious with the people involved. They know exactly what happened.”

http://www.smh.com.au/

http://www.smh.com.au/



Research Paper

The coaching style works best when the leader wants to help teammates build lasting

personal strengths that make them more successful overall.

Jewish-Namibian philanthropist and businessman Harold Pupkewitz was widely

regarded as one of the richest men ever to live in Namibia. Born on July 14, 1915 in

Vilnius, Lithuania, he matriculated in Windhoek in 1932 before completing his B.Com

degree at the University of Cape Town, where he graduated with distinction in 1936. He

joined the family business a year later, a family general dealers store started by his

parents in 1926 which he grew into a successful business conglomerate with an enviable

reputation for “Customer Satisfaction Through Service Excellence”. In July 1946, he co-

founded M Pupkewitz and Sons, a group which under his chairmanship steadily expanded

until it had outlets throughout the country. In 1981, the different companies were brought

together under the umbrella organization Pupkewitz Holdings, which in 2005 employed

848 people nationally. His leadership style can be described as directive leadership, is a

common form of leadership we see in the Namibian sector today, no doubt as a result of

the societal norms and unusual history. As a leader, he played a hands on role in the

business, working long hours and ensuring his instructions were followed. This type of

leader tells the subordinate what to do, and how to do it. He initiates the action about the

things to do and and tells subordinates exactly what is expected of them, specifying

standards and deadlines. They exercise firm rule and ensure that subordinates follow.

As in the case of Pupkewitz, a traditional patriot, this kind of leader is usually found in

more traditional and long standing companies where the prevalent culture in the country is

a more authoritarian type of rule, and especially so in African and Asian countries.



Research Paper

Employees in these organizations will find it hard or sometimes even frustrating to

work there. This is because when a leader behaves in such a way, it restricts the potential

of individuals in the organization by not valuing their creativity and initiative. Even at the

ripe old age of 95 years Harold Pupkewitz chose not to retire. Rather, he invested his

efforts to laying the foundation for the business to run smoothly when he finally “fades

away”, as he put it. “I have always told them I am not planning to retire, like old soldiers I

will fade away,” he said in an interview. He gradually changed his style of management

“making sure there are executives of the right calibre to do things as I used to do it or even

better”. Autocratic leadership style works well if the leader is competent and

knowledgeable enough to decide about each and everything. Authoritative is considered

one of the most effective leadership styles in case there is some emergency and quick

decisions need to be taken. If there is no time left for discussion or weighing various

options, then this type of leadership gives the best results. This style is reminiscent of the

earliest tribes and empires. Obviously, our historical movement toward democracy brings a

negative connotation to autocracy, but in some situations, it is the most appropriate type of

leadership. That, of course, doesn’t mean a blank check to ignore the wellbeing of his

subordinate. Despite the negative perception of this style, Pupkewitz’s success can be

judged from the way his company has advanced in Namibia today and he encompassed

traits from other styles that fostered good employee morale. At the age of 95 years, he

clinched an international deal in which the Pupkewitz Group sold the retail chain Pupkewitz

Megabuild to South Africa’s retail giant, Massmart. The transaction value – believed to be

in excess of hundreds of millions of dollars – was never made public, but no doubt,

Pupkewitz walked away from the deal a happy man. His main concerns during



Research Paper

negotiations with Massmart, he says in an interview, were that the new owners continue to

look after the employees and customers.

“It was only after I had satisfied myself that I went ahead with negotiations. I am glad

to say I look forward to the new owners offering the public an even bigger variety of

services,” he says.

The Pupkewitz Group has grown from a company from the old wagon era, with a

dozen employees, to a diversified company with dozens of subsidiaries and over 1 000

employees. But it can be difficult balancing the use of authority with the morale of the

team. Too much direct scrutiny will make subordinates miserable, and being too heavy

handed will squelch all group input. Being an effective autocratic leader means being very

intentional about when and how demands are made of the team.

Harold Pupkewitz represented Namibian businesses at the highest national and

international levels and delivered many public addresses earning him a well deserved

reputation as a fearless advocate of ethical business and the advantages of the free-

enterprise. He will be remembered for promoting education, having been quoted as saying

“ Educating, as well as creating talented and dedicated people who are able to serve and

improve the management of local companies and resources, is a faster way to increase

economic growth through job creation, and in turn enabling more people to pay tax. “

When assessing the effectiveness of leadership styles, another important factor to

take into consideration was the situational variables that exhist beyond the control of

leaders. According to Tannenbaum and Schmidt (1958) these variables include:



Research Paper

1. "Type of Organisation";

2. "Group Effectiveness";

3. "The Problem Itself" and

4. "The Pressure of Time"

These factors could determine the success of leadership styles, and leadership as a

general instrument of performance. Participative leadership has been found to be more

favourable for moderately structured problems while directive leadership was more

compatible in situations facing fairly structured problems (Kahai, S. et. al, 1997). This most

certainly has implications for the role of leadership styles within the workplace. It could

infer that under circumstances where the problem comprises of routine and repetitive tasks

a participative leadership style is complimentary in motivating employees to sustain

performance. Conversely, problems which are more ambiguous may call for a directive

leadership style to inspire followers and unite towards the same goal. Thus, in one respect,

it could be argued that leadership styles are ineffective in promoting employee

performance as situational variables will ultimately alter overall success. Nevertheless, it is

not unreasonable to dispute that, provided the right style is adopted, leadership style can

be imperative in steering employees towards the right aims using the appropriate methods.

Appendix1

Blake & Mouton's Managerial Grid. (Blake, R.R and Mouton, J.S. 1975)

SHOWING CONSIDERATION High HumanRelations

Democratic

Low Lassez-faire Autocratic



Research Paper

Low High

INITIATING STRUCTURE

Appendix2

Bibliography

Berkowitz, L. (1954) 'Group Standards, Cohesiveness, and Productivity', Human

Relations 7, pp. 509-514.

Blake, R.R. and Mouton, J.S. (1964) The managerial grid. Houston, TX: Gulf

Publishing Company.

Blake, R.R. and Mouton, J.S. (1975) 'An Overview of the Grid', Training and

Development Journal, 29 (5), May, p. 29-36.

Blake, R.R. and Mouton, J.S. (1978) The new managerial grid. Houston, TX: Gulf

Publishing Company.

Blake, R.R. and Mouton, J.S. (1985) The managerial grid III. Houston, TX: Gulf

Publishing Company.

Kirkpatrick, S.A. and Locke, E.A. (1991) 'Leadership: do traits matter?', Academy of

Management Executive, 5 (2), May, p. 48-60.

Likert, R. (1961) New patterns of management. New York; McGraw-Hill.

Mann, R.D. (1959). 'A Review of the Relationship between Personality and

Performance in Small Groups'. Psychological Bulletin, 56, pp. 241-270.

Roberts, A. (2009) Understanding Organizational Behaviour (IB1230) - Ashley Roberts

Lecture Slides: Lecture 3, 'Classical Theories (2): Ford and The Assembly Line'. Slide 8.

Warwick Business School; University of Warwick.

Roberts, A. and Corbett, M. (2009) Understanding Organisational Behaviour IB1230.

Warwick Business School; McGraw Hill Custom Publishing.



Research Paper

Tannenbaum, R. and Schmidt, W. (1958) 'How to Choose a Leadership Pattern',

Harvard Business Review, 36 (2), March/April, p. 95-101.

Yukl, G. (1994). Leadership in organizations. Third edition. Englewood Cliffs, NJ:

Prentice Hall.

http://www.smh.com.au/small-business/blogs/work-in-progress/richard-bransons-

leadership-tips-20100819-12rcr.html#ixzz2NMZdvWpI

http://www.smh.com.au/small-business/blogs/work-in-progress/richard-bransons-leadership-tips-20100819-12rcr.html#ixzz2NMZdvWpI




a contrast of the leadership style of two modern leaders

Documents