1

The Effect of Manager's Leadership Style on Productivity

Student’s Name:

Institutional Affiliation:

Course Name:

Instructor:

Date:

2

The Effect of Manager's Leadership Style on Productivity

Scholars have dedicated a lot of time trying to understand the concept of leadership.

Different scholars have provided different definitions of leadership. According to Northouse

(2004, p 3 as cited in Fairholm, 2015), "Leadership is a process whereby a leader influences a

group of individuals to achieve a common goal." According to Rauch & Behling (1984, p.46, as

cited in Fairholm, 2015), "Leadership is the process of influencing the activities of an organized

group toward goal achievement." These two definitions of leadership focus and emphasize a

leader's ability to influence others as the central ideal of leadership. The ability of a leader to

steer their subordinates towards a given predetermined goal is also clearly highlighted.

Leadership can, therefore, only occur when there are followers and certain goals that need to be

met. A leader's effectiveness is determined by their ability to inspire their subordinates to achieve

the set goals and objectives (Tewari et al., 2019).

Considering the development of leadership concepts and ideas; currently, it is essential to

investigate the effects of leadership styles on teams' productivity. This paper will explore how

managers' leadership styles influence employee productivity. The paper will mainly focus on the

author's past experiences in a work environment.

Historical Development of Leadership Thought

As scholars have studied leadership, four main threads of leadership thought have

emerged: the behavior theory, the trait theory, the situational theory, and the value-based

transformational theory (Fairholm, 2015; Yasir et al., 2016; Ali et al. 2015). The trait theory is

the earliest leadership theory to be developed, with its emergence being most prominent in the

1960s. The trait theory views leadership as simply the study and evaluation of great leaders,

3

including their traits and qualities. The trait theory seeks to answer the question of what makes a

good leader. The basic assumption of the trait theory is that leaders will be born and not made.

This central assumption of the trait theory establishes the theory's different components, which

include personal qualities, personality, and character (Fairholm, 2015). The trait theory triggered

the advent of the great man theory, which encouraged the study of legendary historical leaders

and biographies as the benchmarks of leadership. According to the trait theory, the ideal

leadership traits that will define a successful leader include weight, height, energy, fluency of

speech, physique, intelligence, appearance, judgment, knowledge, and the decision-making

abilities of the leader (Fairholm, 2015). The trait theory also posits that great leaders should be

ambitious, persistent, take the initiative, be responsible, have adequate social skills, self-

confidence, and exemplary emotional control (Fairholm, 2015).

The behavioral theory is also a prominent leadership thread that has been utilized in the

bid to understand leadership. The behavioral theory is quite different from the trait theory in

trying to explain leadership in that the theory focuses on the leader's actions as opposed to a

leader's traits (Yasir et al., 2016). The behavioral leadership theory thus focuses on the functions

and behaviors of leaders. The behavioral theory defines leadership as the sum of the total

4

dominant behaviors that a great leader will exhibit, including getting things done and relating

well with people (Yasir et al., 2016).

The situational theory is also a central theory that has been developed to define

leadership. The situational theory attempts to improve the behavioral theory, which is seen as not

effective in explaining leadership in complicated organizational environments and societies.

Therefore, the situational theory is based on the premise that leaders will exhibit specific

behaviors in specific environments and situations. Therefore, the situational theory defines

leadership based on the actions of a given leader in specific situations, with the actions being

expected to differ based on internal and external processes (Ali et al., 2015). The situational

leadership theory has played a big role in establishing a distinction between leaders and

managers.

In the present times, the focus of the study of leadership has shifted from individuals'

study to the more philosophical examination of leadership. This has resulted in the onset of the

value based transformational theory. This theory focuses more on the broader relationships

among people that are less definable than specific traits and behaviors that show leadership

(Tewari et al., 2019). Value-based transformational leadership does not focus on leaders or

5

specific situations in defining leadership but on common relationship elements exhibited over a

long period and characterize leadership (Tewari et al., 2019).

Leadership Styles

The development of leadership studies has given rise to establishing five leadership styles

exhibited in different contexts. These include transformational, laissez-faire, democratic,

autocratic, and servant leadership styles (Amanchukwu, 2015). The transformational leadership

style entails motivating employees to take ownership of their duties and roles and perform such

roles beyond expectations. Transformational leaders promote a sense of independence and

innovation by not assigning a task from the top and encouraging initiative. Transformational

leaders, therefore, lead by example.

On the other hand, the democratic leadership style encourages and welcomes input from

subordinates and communications when making decisions. Democratic leaders value

relationships and go the extra mile to make their teams feel comfortable and willing to express

their opinions, voice concerns, and ideas. A democratic leader also sees value in consistently

6

providing feedback to their subordinates and views two-way communication as effective

(Fairholm, 2015).

Laissez-Faire leadership is a common leadership style, especially among inexperienced

or new leaders. This leadership style is referred to as hands-off, with the leaders involved rarely

providing feedback or directions to their teams. Leaders who adopt Laissez leadership give their

team members the freedom to perform the functions as they prefer without providing any strong

supervision. Laissez-faire leaders are not seen as strong decision-makers (Yasir et al., 2016).

The autocratic/authoritarian leadership style is also a common leadership style, which is

in stark contrast to the laissez-faire leadership style. Autocratic leaders adopt a hands-on

approach and make all the decisions for their team members. Autocratic leaders also rarely

consider their subordinates' input and take unilateral decisions while withholding information

from their team. Autocratic leaders also show little tolerance for mistakes (Ali et al., 2015).

Overview of the Employer, Management, and Staff Structure

In the past, the author has worked in an organization that utilized a centralized

organizational structure. This organization had an established centralized leadership and chain of

7

command. In the organization, decisions were made by those in leadership positions, with

employees receiving directions from their managers and team leaders. The organization that the

author worked in also adopted the functional organizational structure. Therefore, the functional

organization structure involved the departmentalization of the employees based on common job

functions (Amanchukwu, 2015). In the organization, different employees were grouped into

departments according to their roles. For instance, salespeople were grouped in one department,

accountants in another, and customer service in their own department. Each department had its

own managers and team leaders, with the executive management overseeing all departmental

managers. The functional structure of the organization the author worked for in the past allowed

for a high degree of specialization for all employees and ensured the management of the huge

number of staff who were at least 500.

Analysis

General Findings on the Effect of Leadership Style Employee Productivity

The leadership styles of managers will affect the effectiveness, motivation, and

productivity of employees. This makes the adoption of different leadership styles generate

8

different results in an organization (Tewari et al., 2019). Different leadership styles are

sometimes adopted in the same organization, with a given style being the dominant style, while

some styles are incorporated across different departments. By understanding how different

leadership styles affect productivity, managers can effectively analyze such strategies and adapt

to be more effective.

According to Fiaz et al. (2017), the democratic leadership style will take the approach

that all the team members' opinions will count. Managers who utilize the democratic style are

able to make employees happy and more involved as they will feel more engaged and

empowered in the success of all the organizations. However, despite its benefits, the democratic

leadership style has a shortcoming in that the input of employees on major organizational

decisions can be negative. When managers adopt the democratic leadership style, they may also

risk creating divisions in the organization, for instance, in cases where a given group of

employees outvote others, leading to resentment developing among the losing group as their

ideas will not be effectively implemented. The democratic leadership can also create a lot of

confusion relating to the direction of an organization as there is no individual who will be

providing a sense of direction (Fiaz et al., 2017).

9

According to Islam et al. (2018), the coaching leadership style will generally positively

impact the productivity and morale of employees in an organization. Managers who adopt the

coaching leadership style will encourage their subordinates and be adaptive in ways that they

will effectively review what is working and what is not working and target areas of

improvement. Managers who adopt the coaching leadership styles will promote a sense of good

feeling among employees. Such managers will also provide a clear sense of direction to

employees through effective action plans that will help the employees improve instead of

focusing on negative issues such as performance challenges and problems (Islam et al., 2018).

The use of the coaching leadership style by the manager also makes employees feel that the

organization is actively investing in their success. However, the coaching styles of leadership

may not work if it's not conducted consistently and as a standard part of the employees' review

and training (Islam et al., 2018).

The pacesetting leadership style is a style adopted by managers as a way to set the bar for

productivity mainly through their personal actions. Managers who adopt the pacesetting style are

inspiring. However, they may eventually make their subordinates get burn out, trying to keep up

(Mensah et al., 2018). The pacesetting leadership style can result in a loss of motivation as

10

employees may feel that there is no way that they would keep up with their managers and

therefore retort to stop trying. According to Mensah et al. (2018), the pacesetting leadership

styles can only be effective when supplemented with the coaching leadership style so as to build

the skills and abilities of employees to improve their performance.

In a bid to increase employees' productivity, the manager may also adopt an authoritative

leadership style. This leadership style involves setting strict guidelines related to performance

and enforcing such guidelines without flexibility (Madaan, 2015). Authoritative leadership styles

can be effective in some areas of an organization, such as in sales teams, where employees are

expected to hit certain targets. However, when managers decide to take up the authoritative style

as the most dominant style in an organization, employees may become fearful and stressed.

Managers also adopt other leadership styles, such as the coaching leadership style, so as to help

nurture employees in a way that they can meet and exceed set goals (Madaan, 2015).

Impact of Leadership on Productivity

According to Ibrahim & Daniel (2019), each of the leadership styles will impact the

creation or reforming of company culture. Each style will also produce short and long-term

11

effects. When a manager adopts the authoritative leadership styles, they may produce great

results in the short-term. However, if the manager continues to use authority for an excessive

period of time, employees' productivity will decrease in the long term. Employees under

excessive authoritarianism may get fed up and leave, which may eventually lead to an increase in

turnover. Employees who stay may seek only to perform as per expectations with no creativity or

innovation in their work (Ibrahim & Daniel, 2019).

In contrast, the participative leadership style may appear to be unproductive in the short

term. However, an organization can become more productive in the long-term by adopting the

leadership style. According to Tewari et al. (2019), most managers do not make it to the point of

high productivity through the use of participative style. This is because when such managers see

the productivity in their organizations, dropping they change their leadership style. Adopting

effective leadership styles is, therefore, important in enhancing productivity levels in

organizations. The key issues that managers face trying to adopt the most effective leadership

styles include the lack of patience, organizational environment and settings, and employees'

attitude towards their leadership styles (Ibrahim & Daniel, 2019.

Discussion

12

Past Employers management style and impact on productivity

In the past, the author worked in a medical equipment manufacturing company as a sales

agent. The author's job was to visit healthcare facilities and market the company products. The

organization utilized a centralized organizational structure with a clear chain of command. The

centralized organization was further devolved into a clear functional structure with

departmentalization in the organization based on the role that employees played. For instance,

there was a product development department, innovation department, accounting department,

human resource department, sales department, and customer service department, among many

others. Each department had a manager and team leader with a high degree of specialization, as

all employees played a specific role.

In the medical equipment manufacturing company that the author worked for, the

manager adopted the authoritative leadership style. The manager thus adopted a hands-on

approach and made all the decisions for the sales team members. The manager also rarely

considered the input of their subordinates and took unilateral decisions while withholding

information from the team on many occasions. The manager also showed little tolerance for

mistakes and always expected every member of the sales team to hit their sales target. The

13

authoritative leadership style affected the productivity of the sales team negatively. Though the

team posted great results, especially at the beginning of the year, the performance would stagnate

and eventually fall off. This is because the manager's autocratic leadership style did not allow for

creativity and innovation. This made workers perform only as per expectations and not seek to

push their limits. Most of the employees also decided to leave, complaining that the manager was

not accommodative and that the manager's consistent pressure for them to perform was stressing

them. This led to a high turnover in the sales department with the company needing to frequently

hire new salespeople. The time and resources are taken to train new employees negatively

affected the productivity of the whole team.

Significance of Findings

A manager's leadership style will, therefore, have a great effect on the productivity of

employees in an organization. Each leadership style will have a great effect on company culture

and will produce both short term and long term effects. The democratic leadership style can help

promote creativity, innovation, and productivity in a company. However, the consideration of all

the employees' views may hamper the sense of direction of an organization. The democratic

leadership style may also consume a lot of time in consultations, which may have a negative

14

effect on productivity (Fairholm, 2015). The coaching-style will have a positive effect on morale

and productivity as employees will feel that a company wants them to succeed. The coaching-

style enhances productivity by highlighting areas that employees need to improve on and guiding

them on how to improve (Yasir et al., 2016). Finally, the authoritative leadership style, which

entails providing strict guidelines that employees should follow with no deviation, may promote

employee productivity in the short term but can be largely ineffective in the long run (Fiaz et al.,

2017).

Suggestions for Employer and Future Research

Considering the significant effects that a manager's leadership style will have on

employees' productivity, it is important for managers to adopt the ideal leadership styles such as

the coaching leadership style that will promote growth while encouraging team members to

create, innovate and perform. The coaching leadership style provides employees with a template

of how to perform while still giving them the freedom to innovate (Ibrahim & Daniel, 2019).

In the future, more studies need to be conducted on the use of a combination of different

leadership styles as per the situation that affects managers and how the effect of such

15

combination would have on the productivity of employees. Such a study would be vital in

helping to guide the manager in the adoption of flexible leadership styles as per the situations

that they face.

Conclusion

Leadership styles will have an impact on the creation or reforming of company culture.

Each style will also produce short and long-term effects. The most common leadership styles

managers frequently adopt include the authoritarian, democratic coaching, and the pacesetting

leadership style. Of all the leadership styles, the coaching leadership style is the most effective

style in maintaining productivity in a company in the long run. The coaching leadership style

provides a balance between employee guidance and supervision and creativity and innovation

while also promoting a sense of belonging among employees. The authoritarian leadership style

will have the most devastating effects on productivity as it leads to high employee turnover,

resentment, and lack of motivation. Authoritarian leadership also limits creativity and innovation

in the workplace. The most effective leaders are, however, those that do not stick to a given style

but rather adopt the most appropriate style based on their work environment and situations facing

them.

16

References

Ali, N. M., Jangga, R., Ismail, M., Kamal, S. N.-I. M., & Ali, M. N. (2015). Influence of

Leadership Styles in Creating Quality Work Culture. Procedia Economics and Finance,

31, 161–169. doi:10.1016/s2212-5671(15)01143-0.

Amanchukwu, R.N., Stanley, G.J., Ololube, N.P., (2015). A Review of Leadership Theories,

Principles and Styles and Their Relevance to Educational Management, Management,

Vol. 5 No. 1, pp. 6-14. doi: 10.5923/j.mm.20150501.02.

Fairholm, M. (2015). Defining Leadership. Researchgate.net.

https://doi.org/10.1188/2158256016675396

Fiaz, M., Su, Q., Ikram, A., & Saqib, A. (2017). Leadership styles and employees' motivation:

Perspective from an emerging economy. The Journal of Developing Areas. 51. 143-156.

10.1353/jda.2017.0093.

Ibrahim A. U. & Daniel C. O. (2019). Impact of leadership on organisational performance.

17

International Journal of Business, Management and Social Research, 06(02), 367-374.

https://doi.org/10.18801/ijbmsr.060218.39.

Islam, M., Rahman, M., & Siddiqui, K. (2018). Leadership Styles Navigate Employee Job

Performance. SSRN Electronic Journal. 5. 87-109. 10.2139/ssrn.3504262.

Madaan. S. (2015). Impact of Leadership on Employees Productivity. International Journal of

Engineering Technology Science and Research. Vol. 2, Iss.11.

Mensah, P., Addaquay, A.S., & Davis, M.S. (2018). Effects of Leadership Styles on

Productivity Of Secretaries In The Public Sector. International Journal of Business and

Management Review. Vol.6, No.10, pp.14-32.

Tewari, S., Gujarathi, R., & Maduletty, K.. (2019). Leadership Styles and Productivity. Asian

Social Science. 15. 115. 10.5539/ass.v15n4p115.

Yasir, M., Imran, R., Irshad, M. K., Mohamad, N. A., & Khan, M. M. (2016). Leadership Styles

in Relation to Employees' Trust and Organizational Change Capacity: Evidence From

Non-Profit Organizations. SAGE Open. https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244016675396.

18