Reflexive and critical views of leadership performance in corporate accomplishment
Tóm tắt
This paper intends to shed some light on the relationship between leadership performance and corporate accomplishment through the aid of complexity sciences. The objective is to describe leadership performance in corporate accomplishment using different teleological approaches.
The paper discusses the underlying criteria of the relationship between leadership performance and corporate accomplishment. Case illustration and narrative analogy are also provided.
The authors believe that the discussion highlights a potential downside of leadership performance in corporate accomplishment and its precision rarely highlighted in practice and literature.
There is a reigning assumption in management practice that is based on the belief that a top‐down approach of leadership performance in management and business practices is superior to the bottom‐up approach. It proffers the assumed importance of strategic management issues, but neglects the knowledge, experience, competence and awareness inherent among employees at tactical and operational levels of business practices. It also proffers a mechanical view of employee performance and ignores the worth of the generation of ideas from subordinates in management and business practices that contribute to corporate achievements. Furthermore, it neglects the fact that it is not possible to know the future nor it is predictable.
The paper contends that the importance of top management tends to be inflated in respect to corporate achievements in the management/leadership literature. It also contends that it should be questioned as to whether the top management of corporations are largely responsible for the corporate results on which they attempt to justify their salaries and other benefits. Furthermore, the paper contends that it also should be questioned as to what extent corporate accomplishment may be derived from the performance of the top management in organizations.
The paper strives to contribute to the ongoing discussion of leadership performance in corporate accomplishment in various ways. The principal contributions are: a set of teleological sub‐processes of leadership performance and a case illustration and narrative analogies of teleological leadership performance patterns, in respect to corporate accomplishment in management and business practices. These contributions provide theoretical and managerial ideas and insights to anticipate and avoid deficient or erroneous grounds of leadership performance evaluation in corporate accomplishment.
Từ khóa
Tài liệu tham khảo
Alchian, A.A. (1986), “Evolutionary theory: questioning managerial impact on firm performance”, in Barney, J.B. and Ouchi, W.G. (Eds), Organizational Economics, Jossey‐Bass, San Francisco, CA, pp. 305‐19.
Allen, P.M. (1998a), “Evolving complexity in social sciences”, in Altman, G. and Koch, W.A. (Eds), Systems: New Paradigms for the Human Sciences, Walter de Gruyter, New York, NY.
Allen, P.M. (1998b), “Modelling complex economic evolution”, in Schweitzer, F. and Silverberg, G. (Eds), Selforganization, Dunker & Humbolt, Berlin.
Allen, P.M., Panian, S.K. and Lotz, R.E. (1979), “Managerial succession and organizational performance: a recalcitrant problem revisted”, Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 24 No. 2, pp. 167‐80.
Andersen, J.A. (2000), “Leadership and leadership research”, in Dahiya, D.F. (Ed.), Current Issues in Business Disciplines, Vol. 5: Management II, Spellbound Publications, New Delhi, pp. 2267‐87.
Andersen, J.A. (2002), “What we know about leadership and effectiveness”, paper presented at the First International Workshop on Leadership Research, European Institute for Advanced Studies in Management, EIASM, Oxford, December 16‐17.
Ashby, W.R. (1952), Design of a Brain, Wiley, New York, NY.
Bass, B.M. (1990), Bass & Stogdill's Handbook of Leadership, Free Press, New York, NY.
Beer, S. (1979), The Heart of the Enterprise, Wiley, Chichester.
Beer, S. (1981), The Brain of the Firm, Wiley, Chichester.
Bennis, W. and Nanus, B. (1985), Leaders: The Strategies for Taking Charge, Harper & Row, New York, NY.
Blake, R.R. and Mouton, J.S. (1964), The Managerial Grid, Gulf, Houston, TX.
Boulding, K.E. (1956), “General systems theory: the skeleton of science”, Management Science, Vol. 2 No. 3, pp. 197‐208.
Brown, M.C. (1982), “Administrative succession and organizational performance: the succession effect”, Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 27 No. 1, pp. 1‐16.
Darwin, C. (1859), The Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection or, The Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life, John Murray, London.
Darwin, C. (1871), The Descent of Man, John Murray, London.
Eitzen, D.S. and Yetman, N.R. (1972), “Managerial change – longevity and organizational effectiveness”, Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 17 No. 1, pp. 1‐16.
Fayol, H. (1937), “The administrative theory of the state”, in Gulick, L. and Urwick, L. (Eds), Papers on the Science of Administration, Institute of Public Administration, New York, NY, pp. 99‐114, (originally published in 1923).
Fayol, H. (1948), Industrial and General Administration, Pitman, London, (originally published in 1916).
Fiedler, F.E. (1967), A Theory of Leadership Effectiveness, McGraw‐Hill, New York, NY.
Fizel, J.F. and D'Itri, M.P. (1999), “Firing and hiring of managers: does efficiency matter?”, Journal of Management, Vol. 25 No. 4, pp. 567‐85.
Forrester, J. (1958), “Industrial dynamics: a major breakthrough for decision‐making”, Harvard Business Review, Vol. 36 No. 4, pp. 37‐66.
Forrester, J. (1961), Industrial Dynamics, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
Forrester, J. (1969), The Principles of Systems, Wright‐Allen Press, Cambridge.
Gamson, W.A. and Scotch, N.A. (1964), “Scapegoating in baseball”, American Journal of Sociology, Vol. 70 No. 1, pp. 69‐72.
Goodwin, B. (1951), How the Leopard Changed Its Spots, Weidenfield & Nicolson, London.
Hegel, G.W.F. (1807), Phänomenologie des Geistes, Joseph Anton Goebhardt, Bamberg.
Hegel, G.W.F. (1830), Enzyklopädie der Philosophischen Wissenschaften, Felix Meiner, Hamburg.
Hogan, R., Curphy, G.J. and Hogan, J. (1994), “What we know about leadership – effectiveness and personality”, American Psychologist, Vol. 49 No. 6, pp. 439‐504.
House, R.J. and Baetz, M.L. (1979), “Leadership: some empirical generalizations and new research directions”, in Staw, B. (Ed.), Research in Organizational Behavior, Vol. 1, JAI Press, Greenwich, CT, pp. 341‐423.
Jaffee, D. (2001), Organization Theory – Tension and Change, McGraw‐Hill, New York, NY.
Kant, I. (1987), Critique of Judgement, trans. by Pluhar, W.S., Hackett, Indianapolis, IN, (originally published in 1790).
Lieberson, S. and O'Connor, J.F. (1972), “Leadership and organizational performance: a study of large corporations”, American Sociological Review, Vol. 37 No. 2, pp. 117‐30.
Likert, R. (1961), New Patterns of Management, McGraw‐Hill, New York, NY.
Machiavelli, N. (2004), “Il Principe”, (The Prince), Penguin Classics, Harmondsworth, (originally published in 1532).
Mayo, E. (1949), The Social Problem of Industrial Civilization, Routledge & Kegan Paul, London.
Mott, P.E. (1972), The Characteristics of Effective Organizations, Harper & Row, New York, NY.
Musashi, M. (1982) in Brown, B.J., Kashiwagi, Y., Barrett, W.H. and Sasagawa, E. (Eds), The Book of the Five Rings, Bantam Books, New York, NY, (originally published in 1645).
(The) New Shorter Oxford English Dictionary (1993), Clarendon Press, Oxford.
Nicolis, G. and Prigogine, I. (1989), Exploring Complexity: An Introduction, W.H. Freeman & Company, New York, NY.
Phillips, A.W. (1950), “Mechanical models in economic dynamics”, Econometrica, Vol. 17, pp. 283‐305.
Prigogine, I. (1997), The End of Certainty: Time, Chaos and the New Laws of Nature, Free Press, New York, NY.
Prigogine, I. and Stengers, I. (1984), Order out of Chaos: Man's New Dialogue with Nature, Bantam Books, New York, NY.
Ray, T.S. (1992), “An approach to the synthesis of life”, in Langton, G.C., Taylor, C., Doyne‐Farmer, J. and Rasmussen, S. (Eds), Artificial Life II, Santa Fe Institute, Studies in the Sciences of Complexity, Vol. 10, Addison‐Wesley, Reading, MA.
Reynolds, C.W. (1987), “Flocks, herds and schools: a distributed behavior model”, Herds and Schools: A Distributed Behavior Model, Proceedings of SIGGRAPH 87 Computer Graphics, Vol. 21 No. 4, pp. 25‐34.
Stacey, R.D., Griffin, D. and Shaw, P. (2000), Complexity and Management – Fad or Radical Challenge to Systems Thinking, Routledge, London and New York, NY.
Stewart, I. (1989), Does God Play Dice?, Blackwell, Oxford.
Svensson, G. and Wood, G. (2005), “The serendipity of leadership effectiveness in management and business practices”, Management Decision, Vol. 43 Nos 7/8, pp. 1001‐9.
Taylor, F. (1911), Scientific Management, Harper Brothers, New York, NY.
Thomas, A.B. (1993), Controversies in Management, Routledge, New York, NY.
Giles, L.M.A. (1910), Sun Tzu on the Art of War, Luzac & Co., London.
Tustin, A. (1953), The Mechanism of Economic Systems, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.
von Bertalanffy, L. (1968), General Systems Theory: Foundations, Development, Applications, George Braziller, New York, NY.
Webster's Unabridged Dictionary (1997), Random House, New York, NY.
Wiener, N. (1948), Cybernetics: Or Control and Communication in the Animal and the Machine, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
Yukl, G.A. (1998), Leadership in Organizations, Prentice‐Hall, New York, NY.