Megatrends such as globalization, digitalization, individualization, volatility, and increasing diversity are considered to be the triggers of a noticeable change in the work environment. This results in a reinvention of many companies currently taking place with regard to their corporate structure. The changes affect the entire work environment, interactions and undoubtedly leadership at all levels of companies. In connection with the new environment, discussions often arise in research and practice as to what role leadership actually still plays in companies and whether it is still in line with the times.
How has the role of the manager changed in the last 10 years? The aim of this paper is to compare the different leadership styles and to show to what extent the social competence of a manager can influence the success of change processes. What is the significance of social competence for successful leadership? What can sustainable leadership look like?
Table of contents
1 Introduction
2 Definitions Leadership and Change
3 Leadership style
3.1 The classic leadership styles
3.2 Leadership in the modern age
3.3 Leadership styles in relation to change
4 Contemporary roles of the manager
4.1 Working on the system instead of in the system
4.2 Organisation of learning
4.3 Manager as consultant and coach
4.4 Promoting by demanding
5 Change management in organizations and reasons for change
5.1 Change management and organizational change process
5.2 When and how change occurs
5.3 Reasons for change
5.4 Competencies of managers in change
5.5 Organizational development access to change
6 Social competence as a key competence of the manager
6.1 Emotional intelligence
6.2 Social competence
6.3 Social competence as a key factor
7 Future perspectives and solutions
8 Conclusion
Bibliography
List of figures
Figure 1: The CVF by Quinn.
Figure 2: Managing instability as a challenge
Figure 3: Change competence of executives
Table directory
Table 1: Selected leadership theories and models for leadership in the context of change
Table 2: OE access to change
1 Introduction
Megatrends such as globalization, digitization, individualization, volatility and increasing diversity are regarded as triggers for a noticeable change in the world of work. This results in a current reinvention of many companies with regard to their corporate structure. The changes affect the entire world of work, interactions and undoubtedly leadership at all levels of companies. In connection with the new world of work, discussions often arise in research and practice as to what role leadership in companies actually still plays and whether it is still up-to-date. The commonality of the different management approaches with regard to the network-like way of working is less control, stronger freedom of the employees and less classic hierarchical leadership. A new world of work will only work if there is a common understanding of the corporate spirit among all employees and management. While the classic management functions can mostly be replaced, the meaningful role, the emotional side of leadership is more important than before. Thus, leadership is of greater importance in the new world of work. (cf. Bruch, H./Berenbold, p. 2017: 4-5).
How has the role of the manager changed in the last 10 years? The aim of this term paper is to compare the different leadership styles and to show to what extent the social competence of a manager can influence the success of change processes. What significance does social competence have for successful leadership? What can sustainable leadership look like?
Today, more than before, middle managers are exposed to a test of strength. In change processes, they stand in the field of tension between management and employees as well as between the present and the future. The empty executives are at the same time leaders, leaders and companions. Accordingly, a large number of expectations are placed on them, namely "from below" on the part of the employees, "from above" on the part of the superiors and "from the side" on the part of the colleagues. (cf. Siemann, A. 2012: 1). "One and the same person should be an "entrepreneur", "therapist", "communicator" and "balance artist" at the same time – or (...)a "rational, upward-facing advocate", "emotive, upward-facing champion", "downward-facing evangelist", "dedicated disciple" and "democratic broker". (Siemann, A. 2012: 1-2). However, it remains unclear when, in which situation which behavior is required. (cf. Siemann, A. 2012: 2).
Chapter 2 explains the concepts of leadership and change. The focus is on definitions of organizational change and change in employee management. Chapter 3 provides the classic leadership styles according to Weber, Lewin, Tannenbaum and Schmidt. In addition, the approaches of modern leadership are presented and the leadership styles in relation to the change are explained. Chapter 4 brings the contemporary roles of the manager closer and deals with the integration of coaching into organizational development. Chapter 5 is entirely dedicated to the topic of change management in organizations. For this purpose, the approach of organizational development to change is presented and the competencies of managers in changes are presented. Chapter 6 deals with social competence and defines it as a key factor for successful leadership in change processes. Chapter 7 provides an overview of the future prospects of leadership. In conclusion, the reference to organizational development is clarified and finally recommendations for action with regard to organizational development are derived.
2 Definitions Leadership and Change
Leadership Research looks back on a long tradition. Already the ancient philosophers Plato and Aristotle dealt with the topic of leadership. The main focus was on the nature of leadership in a social and political context. A few centuries later, the poets such as NiccolÒ Machiavelli and William Shakespeare attach great importance to the ambitions of the individual. They created portraits and stories about great leaders, about the Great Men. Karl Marx, Charles Darwin and Max Weber brought through their works above all rational and normative as well as biological perspective of leadership. The modern view of leadership by Sigmund Freud and Burhus Skinner focused on the behavior and personality of the leader. (cf. Enste, H. D./Eyerund, T. /Knelsen, I. 2013: 4).
Depending on the perspective, experience and origin, the term management explained and understood. The mental models of the individual, e.g. of the manager very important. The underlying image of man influences the view and understanding of good leadership. (cf. Grote, S. et al. 2014: 1).
Grote et al. define leadership as follows: "Leadership is the process of influencing the activities of an organized group towards goal setting and goal achievement." (Grote, S. et al. 2014: 1).
Rosenstiel defines leadership as follows: "Leadership is the conscious and goal-oriented influence on people". (Nerdinger, F. W. 2014: 84). The goals of the influence usually follow from the purposes of the organization in which is led. (cf. Nerdinger, F. W. 2014: 84).
Leadership is a continuous process of problem identification and problem solving with the aim of securing the existence of the company, promoting quantitative and qualitative growth and ensuring adequate profitability. The leadership competence of a manager is revealed in his behavior and his choice of leadership instruments in the respective situation and is the result of practice, self-critical reflection and, last but not least, his experience. (cf. Hintz, A. J. 2013: 1).
The actual change can then be spoken of when the immaterial and materialized structures, the order of reality and its embodiment change into materializations. Organizational change means that the form of organization in which a company finds an embodiment is in motion. If irritations, disturbances and contradictions are only assimilated, there can be no talk of change. Only when a significant change in the order of reality occurs within the framework of an accommodation does the organizational change take place. Change does not amount to changing people in the first place. (cf. Rüegg-Stürm, J. 2001:262 f.) "This is not associated with contempt for man, but the idea that people and the organizational flow of events are in a relationship of participation or loose structural coupling, which ensures both sides their integrity and autonomy." (Rüegg-Stürm, J. 2001: 263). On the one hand, people participate primarily in the organizational construction and order of reality through the discourses. On the other hand, the production of a company-specific order of reality is far more than a summative result of an individual's contributions to the organizational flow of events. Only when common descriptions (controversial discourses and observations) cause unspoken certainties of expectations of a large number of actors in a company to drift, reflective learning and thus change can take place. (cf. Rüegg-Stürm, J. 2001:263 f.).
"Organizational change includes all planned, controlled, organized and controlled efforts for anticipatory and targeted organizational design with the purpose of increasing efficiency". (Organizational change: 2017).
The change in employee management is not new and does not come as a surprise. If you look back to the 60s or 70s, how the leadership was exercised, you can see a considerable change. Leadership through hierarchy and position power was the usual practice at that time. At that time, when a director visited a company, the red carpet was rolled out. Everything was designed to please the director. Of course, even then there were managers who achieved acceptance among their employees without external insignia of power anchored in the hierarchy and motivated them to successfully achieve their goals. And this without having to rely on fear reflexes triggered by pressure or threat of punishment. (cf. Comelli, G./von Rosenstiel, L. 2003: 267). A Swiss General Staff officer is said to have once explained the change in the understanding of leadership in the form of three puns. He called the "3-K style" and understood by it: 1. Command, 2. Control, 3. Correct. Such leadership style is called directive, authoritarian or patriarchal. This 3-K conception of leadership then changed with the beginning of the 70s into the so-called "3-F style", which means: 1. Challenge, 2. Promote, and 3. Feedback. The changed communication style made it possible for employees to have a right to feedback. In the meantime, the "3-F leadership" is also getting old and the development is on the way to the "New 3-K style": 1. Context - ecological approach and thinking in networks, 2. culture - value-oriented approach, 3. forces - development of human resources. (cf. Comelli, G./von Rosenstiel, L. 2003: 268 f.). The topic of leadership styles is explained in more detail in the following chapter.
3 Leadership style
Leadership refers to a long-term, relatively stable and situation-independent behavior pattern of the manager, which at the same time expresses the basic attitude towards the employees. (cf. Hintz, A. J. 2013: 24). There is no ideal leadership style, the leadership style must be adapted to the respective situation. A suitable leadership style depends on the manager, the situation, the task and the employees. (cf. Hintz, A. J. 2013: 27). In a crisis situation, the authoritative leadership style is the only applicable one. Whether authoritative or cooperative leadership style, what counts is only the efficiency of a leader's behavior while upholding ethical and moral values. (cf. Hintz, A. J.
3.1 The classic leadership styles
Hintz describes the traditional leadership styles according to Max Weber (1864-1920) as follows: autocratic: strict organization, autocracy, no involvement of employees in decisions, discipline; charismatic: charisma and charisma are the basis for decisions; bureaucratic: the function is not tied to one person but lent and transferable, service instructions and job descriptions regulate the cooperation. (ibid.: 24).
On the other hand, the classic leadership styles according to Lewin (1890-1947). the Authoritarian Leadership style is characterized by the following characteristics: the manager decides autonomously, the participation of the group is excluded, work is carried out only according to instructions, initiative and innovative behavior are undesirable. The only advantage is the ability to act quickly in critical situations. On the other other, the authoritarian leadership style has significantly more disadvantages: employees are demotivated, self-initiative is weakened, employees only act on instructions. Due to the concentration on one person, there is a high risk of wrong decisions. the Democratic Leadership style is characterized by comprehensible decision-making processes for all employees, a high degree of information, communication and space for initiative and creativity. The motivation of the employees is promoted and their ideas and suggestions are taken seriously. The supervisor has the possibility to delegate. But decisions take more time, the superior tries to please everyone, but he can not prevail in an emergency. In the case of laisser-faire, the decisions and their review are the responsibility of the group. Employees should be able to identify the right paths and tasks. The personal strengths of the employees can be brought in. On the other hand, some employees cannot cope with the high degree of freedom. And without the ordering hand of the superior, disorientation can easily occur.
In 1958, Tannenbaum and Schmidt developed the Leadership continuum, which represents a seven-level typology of alternative leadership styles based on participation in decision-making situations. They took the leadership styles developed by the Lewin authoritarian and democratic as poles of a continuum. They inserted five gradations between these extreme points. Between the poles of authoritarian and democratic leadership styles, further derivations of leadership behavior emerge, such as patriarchal, consultative, consultative, participatory, delegative, cooperative. (cf. Hintz, A. J. 2013: 25 f.).
3.2 Leadership in the modern age
When leadership is so important and its influence widely known, the question arises as to why company leaders take so little time to lead. According to a Forsa survey, they spend only a fifth of their working time on employee management, of which almost half is used to solve problems that have already arisen. How is it conducted in this short time? Which classic and which modern management approaches are used? In the following, the most common and most desired styles are presented. (cf. Leadership in Transition. Leadership styles and social megatrends in the 21st century 2013: 14).
The authoritarian leadership style is possibly the oldest and best-known type of leadership. Leadership theory distinguishes between five types of power: Legitimate Power, Reward Power, Coersive Power, Expert Power and Speaker Power. A manager makes the important decisions, determines the control mechanisms and directs the flow of information. As a result, the behavior of the employees can always be presented as a reaction to the instructions of the superiors, so there is a direct cause-and-effect relationship. Managers who act in a highly efficient and goal-oriented manner prefer this leadership style. According to some studies, this leadership style can have a short-term positive effect on group conflicts if they have arisen due to scarce resources or distribution conflicts. (cf. Leadership in Transition. Leadership styles and social megatrends in the 21st century 2013: 14).
The transactional leadership style can also be assigned to the classic leadership style theories. This leadership theory is based on the learning theory principle of reinforcement: The manager controls the path that the employees take in the pursuit of their goals and also the achievement of goals (leadership through target agreements, so-called management by objectives). When the goals are achieved, a corresponding reward is provided in return. (cf. Grote, S. et al. 2014: 6). By receiving the reward, employee satisfaction is also promoted. According to empirical studies, this traditional type of leadership has a positive influence on the company's success and also on the performance of managers. (cf. Leadership in Transition. Leadership styles and social megatrends in the 21st century 2013: 15).
Especially in times of financial, economic and confidence crises, global corporate scandals and increasing ethical challenges for managers, value-oriented leadership can promote sensitization of employees to the social consequences of their actions and thus enable them to do meaningful work. the transformational leadership style is characterized by an inspiring and relationship-oriented leader whose task is to promote and convey social values, ethical guidelines and visions. The leitmotifs of leadership are integrity, fairness and justice. The personality of the manager is relevant for the success of leadership. Transformational leadership is characterized by four characteristics: idealized influence, inspiring motivation, intellectual stimulation and individual consideration. Individual leadership can promote the intellectual abilities and interests of employees, empirical studies show. Positive impact of the transformational leadership style on employee job satisfaction, executive performance, leadership efficiency and company success has been demonstrated. In addition, the transformational management style also has a positive effect on employee participation, creativity and the acceptance of measures for a better work-life balance. (cf. Leadership in Transition. Leadership styles and social megatrends in the 21st century 2013: 16).
At Increasing legitimacy and performance under globalised conditions can authentic guided tour be lived and realized. For the time being, a credible appearance requires the establishment of one's own moral compass. The following dimensions should influence the credibility of a manager: Self-knowledge, transparency, objective processing of information and an internalized moral perspective. Current empirical research shows positive correlations of authentic leadership, job satisfaction, motivation and voluntary overtime. Managers consider an authentic appearance to be increasingly important. (cf. Leadership in Transition. Leadership styles and social megatrends in the 21st century 2013: 17 f.)
The participatory leadership style Will be increasingly in demand in view of the growing complexity of a modern and mechanized company in decision-making and its implementation. In times when leadership is characterized as an activity rather than a power positive, a horizontal distribution of information can be helpful in bringing hierarchical differences into the background. With regard to demographic change, for example, companies can build up their own knowledge networks that counteract the loss of in-house knowledge. Growing personal responsibility, appreciation and mutual trust can be effective both as characteristics and as a correlation between corporate success, employee satisfaction and motivation. The involvement of employees in decision-making is generally customary in performance-oriented and individualized countries. (cf. Leadership in Transition. Leadership styles and social megatrends in the 21st century 2013: 19 f.)
New working conditions resulting from developments in structural change, mechanization and globalization are leading to new, more open and flexible forms of work. This includes the growing importance of the personal responsibility of employees and the development of virtual and heterogeneous Teams for efficient task management. The organization of business processes in teams with rather flat hierarchies allows individual performance to be replaced by a group result, which is composed of individual contributions. Thus, the manager must also meet other requirements, not only the interests of an individual employee, but also of the group as a whole. A difficulty can arise in the management of virtual teams, since neither the team members, the manager, nor the individual members have personal contact with each other. Globalization does not only require practical team leadership skills. It can be very helpful for the leader of a heterogeneous team to adjust to the different ethnic backgrounds and value views of the individual group members in advance. (cf. Leadership in Transition. Leadership styles and social megatrends in the 21st century 2013: 20).
[...]
-
-
-
-
Upload your own papers! Earn money and win an iPhone X. -
-
Upload your own papers! Earn money and win an iPhone X. -
-
Upload your own papers! Earn money and win an iPhone X. -
-
Upload your own papers! Earn money and win an iPhone X. -
-
Upload your own papers! Earn money and win an iPhone X. -
-
Upload your own papers! Earn money and win an iPhone X. -
-
Upload your own papers! Earn money and win an iPhone X.