Organizational Leadership
Part 1

It is important to note, from the onset, that organizational culture can be a rather difficult concept to comprehend for most. This is more so the case given that it has got to do with the interactions between individuals in an organizational setting and how these interactions and behaviors are governed by the prevailing beliefs, values, as well as shared assumptions. In an attempt to help in the evaluation as well as assessment of the relevant organizational culture elements, Edgan Schein came up with a model that we could utilize to assess organizational leadership effectiveness. According to Edgar, the culture’s visible elements are the artifacts. These include, but they are not limited to, the various workplace processes, art, dress codes, as well as structures. Individuals who are not necessarily part of the culture can be able to recognize artifacts (Elisabeth, 2010). Given that these are the visible organizational elements, it would be possible to assess organizational leadership effectiveness by, amongst other things, evaluating how well the organization allocates tasks and coordinates activities so as to achieve its aims. On the other hand, espoused values are inclusive of “the values of the organization such as annual goals, vision statements, and accepted norms” (Elisabeth, 2010, p. 208). In that regard, therefore, espoused values could in some instances be represented by the plans and strategies put in place to accomplish organizational goals. On this front, organizational leadership effectiveness could be assessed by determining whether the top leadership of the organization properly expresses and advances the various philosophies as well as strategies critical for organizational success. Lastly, basic underlying assumptions are inclusive or representative of “the underlying values in the organization which, while not expressly stated, set the guiding tone for how organizational members take action” (Elisabeth, 2010, p. 208). The said values may not be obvious to members of the culture. With that said, organizational leadership effectiveness at this level could be assessed via the evaluation of not only the efficiency level of employees, but also their morale.

The five disciplines of learning organizations, as formulated by Peter Senge, include “personal mastery, mental models, building shared vision, team learning and systems thinking” (Wilkinson, 2015, p. 117). It would be prudent to assess each discipline in an attempt to describe the leadership efforts that would come in handy in my organization so as to begin practicing the said disciplines. To begin with, when it comes to building a shared vision, the relevance of fostering interaction with organizational employees cannot be overstated. In that regard, therefore, to begin practicing this particular discipline, leaders in my organization must ensure that their personal visions are shared by way of transferring and referring them as would be appropriate. With regard to system’s thinking, there is need for leaders in my organization to embrace the fact that actions and consequences are correlated. Leaders must see the bigger picture instead of focusing on specific actions in isolation. Next, we have mental models. Employees, as Peter Senge points out, ought to be aware of what the company values are and also have good understanding of the operational aspect of the business (Wilkinson, 2015). Today, businesses operate in a truly dynamic environment. In that regard, therefore, organizational leaders ought to be ready to embrace change and make adaptations so as to fit into new models. When it comes to team learning, ‘thinking together’ is a concept that is of great relevance in attempting to promote shared knowledge as well as insights and experiences (Wilkinson, 2015). The organizational leadership ought to ensure that team members deem their colleagues as collaborators, as opposed to competitors or rivals. An environment should be created whereby continuous learning is promoted by viewing mistakes as learning opportunities. Lastly, we have...…objectives. Jobs seems to have been well aware of the fact that to create a really innovative company – a company that was ahead of the competition when it came to the development and creation of new products and featured – he had to piece together a team that was not only competent, but also motivated and creative. He had to ensure that the sense of self that employees possessed was linked to the organization’s values. While transactional leaders tend to function within the culture of the organization that is already in place, transformational leaders like Steve Jobs appear to be appreciative of new ideas and ready to adopt courses of actions that could end up transforming the culture of the organization.

Leadership ought to be about the willingness as well as ability to trigger positive transformation. Transformation in this case should seek to impact the lives of others meaningfully. There is no shortage of leaders who have brought about positive change. On the technology front, Steve Jobs is one such leader. This worldview could be compared with several elements of organizational leadership. One of the key elements of organizational leadership, according to Zaccaro and Klimoski (2002), has got to do with “processes and proximal outcomes (such as worker commitment) that contribute to the development and achievement of organizational purpose” (6). The organizational purpose should in this case be aligned with the overall goal of positive impact. Zaccaro and Klimoski (2002) are also of the opinion that the application of influences that are non-routine on organizational life is yet another key element of organizational leadership. Effort ought to be applied in seeking to be responsive to the needs of all stakeholders who include, but they are not limited to, employees, shareholders, suppliers, as well as creditors.

…