Write a four to five (4-5) page paper in which you:

1. Determine two (2) leadership theories and two (2) leadership styles that support the definition of a public leader. Provide a rationale for your response.
2. What are the differences, if any, between successful leaders in public, private, and non-profit organizations? Cite experiences and research to support your assertions.
3. Some think leadership is a born ability. Some think leadership can be learned. Some think leadership is a product of a need or challenge. What do you think? Cite experiences and research to support your assertions.

Include at least four (4) peer-reviewed references (at least one must be no more than 3 months old) from material outside the textbook. Note: Appropriate peer-reviewed references include scholarly articles and government websites. Wikipedia, other wikis, and any other websites ending in anything other than “.gov” do not qualify as academic resources.

Your assignment must follow these formatting requirements:

• Be typed, double spaced, using Times New Roman font (size 12), with one-inch margins on all sides; citations and references must follow APA or school-specific format. Check with your professor for any additional instructions.
• Include a cover page containing the title of the assignment, the student’s name, the professor’s name, the course title, and the date. The cover page and the reference page are not included in the required assignment page length.

The specific course learning outcomes associated with this assignment are:

• Evaluate the theories and models of public leadership.
• Differentiate among the styles of public leadership.
• Differentiate between leadership in public, private, and non-profit organizations

 

SOLUTION

Leadership Theories and Styles in Public Leadership

Various leadership theories have been developed to explain the attributes of good leadership. Two of these, situational leadership and servant leadership theories, depict two important characteristics of a public leader. These are flexibility and being a servant leader, respectively. Situational leadership is a model that urges leaders to adjust their leadership style depending on the competence and commitment of their followers (Deshwal, & Ali, 2020). Therefore, this theory argues that no leadership style is superior to the other. Several levels of follower characteristics are described in situational leadership. One of these, for instance, involves followers who are highly committed but incompetent. In such a case, authoritative leadership is required to guide followers. This is appropriate as it facilitates learning for the employees or followers. In contrast, highly competent and committed followers do not require much supervision since they are capable and willing to discharge their duties. Delegation is suitable for such employees. Therefore, situational leadership calls for leaders to exercise flexibility while dealing with followers in the different programs they undertake. Servant leadership model, on the other hand, encourages leaders to focus on the need and desires of their followers or the community, instead of working to influence them (Deshwal, & Ali, 2020). Furthermore, this model is also focused on the growth and development of the followers. Proponents of this theory argue that by adopting this theory, a leader gains the support of the followers who reciprocate through better performance, and more commitment. Furthermore, the servant leadership model embodies the desirable characteristics of a public leader including empathy, listening, awareness, building community, stewardship, persuasion, and the desire and commitment to building others.

Different leadership styles have been advanced within the leadership models. Among them are democratic and coaching leadership styles.    Democratic leadership alludes to the inclusion of everyone, a primary quality in every public leader (Saxena, Desanghere, Stobart, Walker, 2017). It calls for a leader to seek the opinion of others before making major decisions. Such a leader must also possess listening skills. Democratic leadership brings the whole members onboard a given project, ensuring that they feel like part of the team. Coaching leadership, on the other hand, calls for a public leader to show empathy towards his followers. Such a leader shows interest in people’s goals and establishes programs aimed at building for future success. The relationship between the leader and follower extends beyond organizational goals as the former takes a personal interest in the latter’s dreams. Coaching leadership matches to the public leadership quality of desire to empower others in life.

Differences between Successful Leaders in Public, Private, and Non-Profit Organizations    

Successful leadership exhibits different characteristics across public, private, and Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs). Although Laub (2018) notes that the purpose of any form of leadership is to bring a positive change, different organizations have different goals. For instance, private organizations are generally profit-oriented while the public sector is majorly concerned with service delivery. NGOs, on the other hand, aim to accomplish different social programs without profit considerations. These varied goals call for different approaches to leadership. For instance, in the effort to deliver, one of the major concerns in the public sector is the Public Service Motivation (PSM) (Jensen, Andersen, & Jacobsen, 2019). PSM refers to an individual’s inclination to deliver services to a community. Such an individual is motivated by the desire to good for others. Transformational leadership is recommended for fostering PSM. This is a form of leadership that brings about positive change and value in people and systems. Employees are encouraged to be creative and innovative in coming up with solutions to various problems. Furthermore, to facilitate the understanding of the community’s needs, servant leadership is required in the public sector. This leadership model facilities service delivery by encouraging leaders to pay close attention to their followers’ demands. In the case of NGOs, the aim is to bring a social change such as empowering a community through education programs. Hence, transformational leadership comes in handy. Mufti, Xiaobao, Shah, Sarwar, & Zhenqing (2019) note that this form of leadership brings about job satisfaction. This is an important feeling in an organization that does not use profit as a measure of success. Finally, leadership in private organizations calls for greater flexibility since the focus is on short term goals and profits. For instance, a software-developing company will finish on one project and move on to the next. Similarly, a phone manufacturing company moves from working on one model to another. Such an environment calls for situational leadership which adopts flexibility in leadership styles (Deshwal, & Ali, 2020). The ability and commitment of the works require a continuous assessment to determine the best leadership style. This portrays a difference in successful leadership across various sectors.

The organizational structure also accounts for differences in leadership. Rassa and Emeagali (2020), state that there is a relationship between organizational structure and leadership. Furthermore, Islam, Said, Sumardi, & Rahman (2020), assert that public sectors tend to be more centralized than the private sector. Such differences affect successful leadership. For instance, a successful leader in a centralized organization is required to be visionary and authoritative to achieve results. Such a leader also has to deal with shortcomings such as delays in work due to bureaucracy. On the other hand, decentralization within private organizations calls for a leader who is democratic and able to delegate duties. The centralization structure is also common in NGOs as Tran (2020) states. This relationship between successful leadership and organizational structure is evident from the recent trend towards privatization and public-private partnerships. It has vice been observed that service delivery is better in private organizations than in the public sector (Cherry, Grasse, & Ihrke, 2018). This is partly due to decentralization that facilitates efficiency.

Inborn and Learned Leadership

Although certain inborn qualities favor leaders, leadership is also a learned quality. Afrianty (2020), notes that leadership qualities such as emotional intelligence and character are both inborn and learned. Furthermore, other characteristics such as ethics and credibility are not innate but acquired through learning. Also, it has been observed that current leaders in both public and private institutions become better leaders after undergoing training. This was the case according to research studies by Andersen, Bøllingtoft, & Jacobsen, (2016). Andersen et al. (2016) noted that after training, such leaders were better perceived by their employees and took a more active role than before. This notion is also supported by looking at common leadership qualities. These include effective communication, integrity, humility, accountability, delegation, confidence, and vision.  Such qualities do not require unique genes. One can learn to practice effective communication skills. The same case applies to virtues such as integrity and accountability that are adopted by principle. Hence, constant practice, training, and experience result in great leadership.

References

Afrianty, T. W. (2020). Are Leaders Born Or Made?: A Point Of View. Jurnal Penelitian IPTEKS, 5(1), 17-23.

Andersen, L. B., Bøllingtoft, A., & Jacobsen, C. B. (2016). Are Leaders born or made? Leadership Training Effects on Employee Perceptions of Leadership. The 2016 Academy of Management Annual Meeting.

Cherry, B. D., Grasse, N. J., & Ihrke, D. M. (2018). Perceptions of Privatization in Michigan. Human Service Organizations: Management, Leadership & Governance, 42(1), 86-94.

Deshwal, V., & Ali, M. A. (2020). A Systematic Review of Various Leadership Theories. Journal of Commerce, 8(1), 38-43.

Islam, M. Z., Said, T. F., Sumardi, W. A., & Rahman, S. (2020). Factors Affecting Organizational Effectiveness: A Proposed Framework for Brunei’s Public Sector. International Journal of Asian Business and Information Management (IJABIM), 11(2), 15-27.

Jensen, U. T., Andersen, L. B., & Jacobsen, C. B. (2019). Only when we agree! How value congruence moderates the impact of goal‐oriented leadership on public service motivation. Public Administration Review, 79(1), 12-24.

Laub, J. (2018). The Purpose of Leadership: Leadership That Moves the World. In Leveraging the Power of Servant Leadership, 1-14. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham.

Mufti, M., Xiaobao, P., Shah, S. J., Sarwar, A., & Zhenqing, Y. (2019). Influence of leadership style on job satisfaction of NGO employee: The mediating role of psychological empowerment. Journal of Public Affairs, e1983.

Rassa, H., & Emeagwali, L. (2020). Laissez fair leadership role in organizational innovation: The mediating effect of organization structure. Management Science Letters, 10(7), 1457-1462.

Saxena, A., Desanghere, L., Stobart, K., & Walker, K. (2017). Goleman’s Leadership styles at different hierarchical levels in medical education. BMC medical education, 17(1), 169.

Tran, L. (2020). International NGO Centralization and Leader-Perceived Effectiveness. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 49(1), 134-159.