Organizational Leadership Of Swedish Company-Samples Assessment Answer

ke technological advancement are quite a priority as they determine the efficiency of the organization's productivity.

It follows that modern leaders are required to have a healthy relationship with their subordinates since this is needed for the productivity of the organization. The maturity level of the employees is a determinant factor on what leadership style he is supposed to adopt. A low maturity implies that a task-oriented leadership style should be followed while a high maturity calls for minimum supervision.

Case Study

I adopted a case study of a Swedish company which is found in Stockholm. Its main operation entails construction and production of cable machines for use in industrial work. This company holds a good record of its market competitiveness. In order to maintain this competitiveness, it has to continually upgrade its technology. The organization boasts a well-structured self-management system and a culture that majorly advocate for the development of employee's skills for the betterment of the operations. Market surveys suggest that the company has had a better economic performance in comparison to other related companies (Rousseau and Aubé 2010, p.757).

The leader of this company has adopted a decentralized structure with no formal hierarchy, foremen and time clocks. The teams are self-managed where employees are obliged to take initiatives, handle responsibilities, try new things, adapt to changes and be co-operative with the organization's requirement. There exists a great ambition to avoid division in the organization (Hollander 2013, p.69). For instance, all employees take turns in cleaning the workplace and managing the reception.

Self-management of these teams makes them goal-oriented. The company sets annual and quarterly goals with the aid of a structured schedule that all employees have to follow. The employees in this organization are setting their goals weekly as required of the schedule. A 9 am to 12 pm coffee break is held on a daily basis where all employees are required to attend. This break is used for information meetings in the event that there are some developments within the organization.

Critique

Self-management of organizations is not always a good approach as it also meets numerous challenges. There is occasional wastage of time in the event that one team is behind schedule. This particular team may require additional time to complete its obligation thus causing a lag in complementation of plans and policies. High investment comes hand in hand with the development of employees' skills thus decreased level of profits. Numerous job rotations cause early inefficiencies as change takes place (Van De Voorde, Paauwe and Van Veldhoven 2012, p.397). This results from lack of experience in the new field of work. Employees may even fail to adapt to new working conditions. Self-managed teams have different tasks designated to them thus some level of inequality. It follows that equal treatment to the success of a task is not possible as most teams would suggest. By giving them the opportunity to manage themselves, employees may exhibit insubordination and recklessness.

Strains, Dilemmas, and Contradictions Facing Management

Strains may occur in workplaces whereby the management is cautious about meeting a particular target over a designated time period. This attribute inflicts pressure on employees as they work tirelessly to meet requirements (Bhagat et al. 2010, p.17). The end results may not be pleasant and may incur losses to the organization.

Contradictions need to be avoided in management. Being friendly to your subordinates doesn't mean that you should get intimate with them. A manager should ensure that there exists a boundary so as to avoid disrespect from his subordinates. Cases occur that employees disregard the authority of their manager and even fail to follow instructions delegated by him.

A dilemma may be experienced in management in the event that the organization has to choose between innovation or conservation of their existing project (Schreyögg and Sydow 2010, p.1251). Returns from innovation are long-term, but they can't be avoided whatsoever. In order to maintain competitiveness, an organization has to innovate even though much will be spent on the same.

Ways to Maintain Good Leadership

It is my responsibility as a leader to uphold a favourable business culture. A toxic culture would be detrimental to future innovation (Eisenbeiß and Giessner 2012). I need to acknowledge the relevance of technological advancement for better productivity of my organization. We have not yet integrated technological upgrade in our organization thus a need to do so. Above all, I'm to ensure a good relationship with my fellow colleagues. Team-building will prove to be beneficial as it raises the morale of workers.

Conclusion

A good management system motivates workers towards competency (Bello 2012). Treatment of employees in regard to their contribution to the organization is of great essence. Moreover, a good working environment contributes to efficient resource utilization as consultation and sharing are possible.

References

Bello, S.M., 2012. Impact of ethical leadership on employee job performance. International Journal of Business and Social Science, 3(11).

Bhagat, R.S., Krishnan, B., Nelson, T.A., Moustafa Leonard, K., Ford Jr, D.L. and Billing, T.K., 2010. Organizational stress, psychological strain, and work outcomes in six national contexts: a closer look at the moderating influences of coping styles and decision latitude. Cross Cultural Management: An International Journal, 17(1), pp.10-29.

Eisenbeiß, S.A. and Giessner, S.R., 2012. The emergence and maintenance of ethical leadership in organizations. Journal of Personnel Psychology.

Henderson, K.H., DeWalt, D.A., Halladay, J., Weiner, B.J., Kim, J.I., Fine, J. and Cykert, S., 2018. Organizational Leadership and Adaptive Reserve in Blood Pressure Control: The Heart Health NOW Study. The Annals of Family Medicine, 16(Suppl 1), pp.S29-S34.

Hollander, E.P., 2013. Organizational leadership and followership. Social Psychology at Work (Psychology Revivals): Essays in Honour of Michael Argyle, p.69.

Rousseau, V. and Aubé, C., 2010. Team self-managing behaviors and team effectiveness: The moderating effect of task routineness. Group & Organization Management, 35(6), pp.751-781.

Schreyögg, G. and Sydow, J., 2010. Crossroads—organizing for fluidity? Dilemmas of new organizational forms. Organization science, 21(6), pp.1251-1262.

Van De Voorde, K., Paauwe, J. and Van Veldhoven, M., 2012. Employee well?being and the HRM–organizational performance relationship: a review of quantitative studies. International Journal of Management Reviews, 14(4), pp.391-407.