Transformation programmes are led from the top within organisations and do not usually rely on an external ‘change agent’ as did traditional ‘organisation development’, although a specialist leader may be brought into an organisation to initiate the process, should guidance be needed on aspects such as strategic planning and reorganisation. The prerequisite for a successful programme is the presence of a transformational leader who motivates others to strive for higher-order goals rather than merely short-term interest. Transformational leaders go beyond dealing with day-to-day management problems; they commit people to action and focus on the development of new levels of awareness of where the future lies, and commitment to achieving that future. Transformational leaders are different to everyday ‘transactional’ leaders, who operate by building up a network of interpersonal transactions in a stable situation and enlist compliance rather than commitment through the reward system and the exercise of authority and power. Transactional leaders may be good at dealing with immediate problems but may not provide the vision required to transform the future.
The transition from where the organisation is to where it wants to be is the critical part of the transformation programme. Transition management starts from defining future state and diagnosing present state. The situation many businesses find themselves in is one of stagnation and a transformational leader may be required to move to the next level and reinstate steady growth. Individual client performance may show growth and decline indicating that account management and relationship building need to be addressed. Development of product technology may have led to increased service capability but a clear plan to monetise this development may be needed. It should be accepted within the upper tier of the organisation that growth of this nature demands fresh leadership, strategy and tactical activity. Therefore, at the outset the immediate focus of the transformation programme should be on relationship building – developing clear understanding and focus on potential risks (to mitigate loss) and new opportunities (to develop growth). Leadership needs to define a clear and achievable growth strategy. The next stage is to decide on new processes, systems, procedures, structures, products and markets to be developed. Having defined these, work can be programmed and the resources required can be defined. The plan for managing the transition should include provisions for involving people in the process and for communicating to them what is happening, why it is happening and how it will affect them, the aim being to get as many people as possible committed to the change. Buy-in can be fostered by opening the planning to all in the business to contribute to and own. The outputs of this planning process should be a series of growth driver action plans, the formulation of which should involve all members of staff, each with objectives that translate into tactical activity for the short, medium and long term.
The plans must be regularly communicated to all and are critically analysed, open to challenge and re-aligned as required. A key trait commonly associated with good leaders is open-mindedness, encouraging them to accept opinions from others who can make a difference and evade myopic thinking. Participative decision making can be beneficial to workers’ job satisfaction and has been shown to have a positive relationship with performance (Wilkinson & Wagner, 1993). However, it can be asserted that the leadership provided is largely a result of CD’s traits and style. There should be significant congruence between the individual leading the transformation programme and those traits traditionally associated with the effective leader. Emotional intelligence – the ability to rein in emotional impulses, to read another’s innermost feelings and to handle relationships and conflict smoothly – is said to be a crucial leadership trait (Goleman, 2000). Another quality that emerges as important in the range of leadership skills is innovation, as with innovation the entire experience of successful interacting between the leader, the followers, and the situation would become more interesting as well as more persuasive for all parties, and that leaders must be innovative in order to stay ahead of competitors.
While leadership style has an impact on organisations, teams and work climate, efficacious leaders should not rely on a single leadership style. In Situational Leadership Theory (SLT), leadership effectiveness is thought to be enhanced if a manager uses the style of leadership that best matches the readiness, ability and willingness of subordinates and that a good match between leadership style and subordinate readiness leads to a higher level of subordinate satisfaction and performance. SLT’s four quadrants represent four basic leadership styles: high task and low relationship (S1, telling); high task and high relationship (S2, selling); low task and high relationship (S3, participating); low task and low relationship (S4, delegating), the central precept is that as the level of follower readiness increases, effective leader behaviour will involve less structure (task orientation) and less socio-emotional support (relationship orientation). A leader’s task and relationship behaviours interact with subordinate readiness to significantly influence leader effectiveness, which is defined as the extent to which a follower demonstrates the ability and willingness to accomplish a specific task. At the lower levels of readiness, the leader needs to provide direction but with higher levels of readiness, followers become responsible for task direction. There is no one best way to influence people and leaders need to assess the readiness level and then use the appropriate leadership style. Thus, it is the follower who dictates the most appropriate leader behaviour (Hersey, Blanchard, & Johnson, 2008). Organisations at the level of stagnant growth described supports will often be positioned at R3 (Able but insecure or unwilling) in the Hersey-Blanchard matrix, requiring leadership of the sort that might elevate the group to R4 (Able and confident and willing), in which followers have the ability to perform and are confident about doing so and are committed.
Research support for SLT is mixed. Research has found results that were highly supportive of the theory in that, when applying the theory correctly, managers will generally rate subordinates job performance more highly (Hambleton & Gumpert, 1982). However, other research found no support for the assumption that subordinate maturity (readiness) moderates the relationship of leader task and relationship behaviours with leader effectiveness (Blank, Weitzel, & Green, 1990).
Steps required to transform an organisation have been defined (Kotter, 1995). First is to establish a sense of urgency, which can be done through close scrutiny of market realities, and identification and open discussion of potential crises or major opportunities. Second is to encourage and entrench teamwork, which can be done through the broad coalition that formulates the action plans described previously, as well as additional team-building projects such as a charity fundraising events. The next step is creating a vision to help direct the change effort and developing strategies for leading that vision. The leader must then communicate the new vision and strategies. Others must then be empowered to act on the vision. Transformational leaders engage in ‘inspiration’ behaviours which build subordinates’ self-confidence with respect to goal attainment. Leaders who convey high expectations promote the self-efficacy and motivation of subordinates, and ultimately establish norms for individual initiative and achievement-oriented behaviours. In contrast, transactional leadership might have the opposite effect. Management-by-exception behaviours focus primarily on mistakes or slippage of performance below certain levels, which can inadvertently communicate to subordinates that poor performances are anticipated, but they are not expected to take initiative to correct it. Such transactional behaviours are likely to suppress empowering norms. The next stage is to plan for and create short-term wins. Following that, improvements should be consolidated, new approaches institutionalised and the means to ensure leadership development and succession developed.
References
Blank, W., Weitzel, J. R., & Green, S. G. (1990). A test of the situational leadership theory. Personnel Psychology, 43 (3), 579-597.
Goleman, D. (2000, March). Leadership that gets results. Harvard Business Review , 78-90.
Hambleton, R. K., & Gumpert, R. (1982). The validity of Hersey and Blanchard’s theory of leader effectiveness. Group and Organization Studies, 7 (2), 225-242.
Hersey, P., Blanchard, K., & Johnson, D. (2008). Management of Organizational Behavior: Leading Human Resources. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.
Kotter, J. J. (1995). A 20% Solution: Using rapid re-design to build tomorrow’s organization today. New York, NY: Wiley.
Wilkinson, A. D., & Wagner, R. M. (1993). Supervisory styles and state vocational rehabilitation, counselor job satisfaction and productivity. Rehabilitation Counseling Bulletin, 37 (1), 15-24.
