When Research was Carried Out

Organizations control their activities through leadership. The research seeking to find the influence of leadership styles on employee creativity was carried out between 1995 and 2009 (Derecskei 2016, p. 104). The research on charismatic leadership, however, was carried out in 1977 (Sy, Horton and Riggio 2018, p. 103). Regardless of the leadership style used, there is an impact on employees in which creativity is one of the most influenced.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Order now

Where Research was Carried Out

The research was carried out in Hungary's labor market. This came after Hungary's ranking in the third quarter of the European Union's innovation order (Derecskei 2016, p. 108). However, the research on charismatic leadership has been a continuous activity in which there are reference and analysis of existing information (Sy, Horton and Riggio 2018, p. 104). The timing of the two research is different due to factors surrounding them. For instance, the Hungarian research was carried out when the country was in the limelight because of its performance regarding competitiveness in Europe.

Research Methods Used

Qualitative methods of research were used in the study in which evidence collection regarding the influence of styles of leadership on employee creativity (Tracy 2013, p. 3). For instance, 600 employees were subjected to interviews to gather their opinions, feelings, and responses to the country's leadership style. This potentiates the discussion of Elicit-Channel (EC) models of captivating governance where the style of leadership was labeled a five-step cyclical process (Sy, Horton and Riggio 2018, p. 104). Empirical modes also indicated qualitative and quantitative methods in which specific figures of individuals were given against the respective influence of leadership styles on their creativity (Derecskei 2016, p. 110). This enables quantification of individuals whose creativity was enhanced as well as those inhibited.

Size of Sample

The research is seeking answers on how leadership styles affect employee innovativeness targeted Hungary's workforce. However, the actual research engaged 600 of the country's employees (Derecskei 2016, p. 115). Thus, the sample size was quite small as compared to the overall objective of the study. The studied 600 employees represented the country's workforce. They provided information on how the country's style of leadership influenced their creativity.

Theoretical Approach Used

The inhibitory and stimulating effects of different leadership styles on employee creativity are the fundamental theoretical approach used, and is assumed to apply in all countries (Derecskei 2016, p. 116). Thus, it is assumed that other factors such as environment, availability or resources as well as technology are not important. Largely, there is no interplay created between the effectivity of combining leadership with availability or resources, technology, and the creation of a conducive environment in achieving high employee creativity.

Task 2

Comparison and a Contrast on the Author's Theoretical Frame of the Primary Research

Leadership styles in the workplace have a direct impact on the creativity of their employees (Derecskei 2016, p. 116). The illustration behind this is that democratic leadership stimulates creativity while authoritarian leadership inhibits employee creativity (Nejati 2010, p. 11). Consider a situation where democratic leadership elucidates tolerance at the workplace. Another way through which creativity is bumped up in organizations is through mentoring of employees by their leaders (Passmore, Peterson and Freire, 2016, p. 116). To this end, the author was associating the results of the actual search and the theoretical aspects of leadership styles and employee creativity in which much of the results reflected the theoretical perspectives of the subject.

Future prediction of event surrounding the impact of leadership styles on employee creativity, based on the existing results, remains imminent. For instance, the qualitative analysis of how democratic leadership stimulates employee creativity is used to predict future outcomes regarding the style. The context pertinent to this point is that leadership potentiates employee development through training. To this end, employees look up to their leaders for mentorship through practical lessons as well as set examples.

The Strengths and Weaknesses of the Article

The fundamental strength of the article is its thorough demonstration of how leadership styles impact on employee creativity. It outlines and demonstrates the positive and negative impacts of these styles on employees. For instance, democratic leadership is indicated to stimulate employee creativity (Northouse 2018, p. 6). Conversely, the authoritarian leadership inhibits employee creativity (Northouse 2018, p. 5). Demonstrating these points are cases where an employer enables employees to make choices, get their opinions or even bring new ideas and put them into action. This is how creativity materializes under democratic leadership. The converse, dictatorial leadership, clip employees' choices and disregards their opinions. However, the article does not give details of the disadvantages and flaws of each of the leadership styles. For instance, employee demotivation in a dictatorship and untimely decision-making in democratic leadership (Timby and Smith 2013, p. 55). Another fundamental weakness of the article is that it neither suggest nor propose effective solutions to the shortcoming of the different styles of leadership. Again, there are situations where whichever the style of leadership used since there is no guarantee for the enhancement of leadership. Consider a situation where an individual has become rebellious to the organization or where an individual desire to leave the organisation, but the organisation is holding him or her hostage because of a reason like a loan or damages. Such an employee may decide to resistant to any calling or assignment, especially if it will benefit the organisation.

Task 3

Part 1: Leadership Development

As seen in the two articles, leadership development remains one of the widely discussed topics because it touches on fundamental aspects of life such as social justice, social inequities as well as ethics and morals (Young, Crow, Murphy and Ogawa 2009, p. 273). Naturally, it touches on the fundamental aspects of life, whether at the workplace or home. In this perspective, leadership is indicated to either stimulate or inhibit creativity among employees. This is justifiable by the fact that authoritarian and democratic leadership contributes to creativity differently, and thus, leadership development is a subject to discussion in different perspectives.

In another argument, charismatic leadership has been painted ambiguous (Sy, Horton and Riggio 2016, p. 67). To this end, there are parsimonious rationales that cannot account for the reasons as to why particular styles of leadership are regarded as charismatic. This uncertainty sets the pace for discussions seeking to justify or discount the various styles of leadership as charismatic. For instance, the tendency of leaders to exploit their subject's emotions, admiration and compassion to compel them into action is a wide topic. This is because there is variance and inconsistency in this perspective since different leaders deploy various strategies.

The contentious debate on leadership development is potentiated between individuals routing for the various styles of leadership. This is because of the conflict of ideology among them. However, much of the debate materialized between employees and their employers. This is also a product of ideology in which employees would prefer particular styles of leadership. Consider a situation where employees call for democratic leadership while organization management is in for dictatorship. The development of leadership that favors both parties in such cases is quite problematic.

Part 2: A Critical Reflection of My Leadership Styles and Behaviour

In most cases, I enjoy applying the democratic style of leadership. In this manner, I engage my subjects and colleagues to a participatory forum and allow them to take part in leadership. A typical situation that reflects this is a scenario where I was helping my organization curb employee absenteeism. In this situation, the human resource department was opting for the authoritarian approach in which it was asking employees who are not willing to play by the organization's rules to leave so that they can be replaced by those who will cooperate.

When I realized that there were questions to be answered by the employees so that they could explain the high prevalence of absenteeism, I quickly advised the human resource department to consider listening to the grievances of the employees. In the long run, it was a revelation that some employees were not satisfied with the working terms and conditions, and thus, there were on a go-slow because the human resource department was unapproachable and could not listen to their grievances. To this end, a leader's behavior is shown to influence creativity (Sy, Horton and Riggio 2016, p. 116).

In other cases, I would engage employees in decision-making processes. Every time I engaged employees, I could learn a new issue with the organization or instead, come across a new grievance. This, in turn, drew the employees closer to the organization, and this fostered close ties between the organization's management and its employees.

Conclusion

International leadership is a multi-dimensional subject. However, the major underlying point is leadership theories are posting diverse results when applied in organizations. For instance, the application of authoritative and democratic leadership styles trigger mixed reactions among those who favor and those who do not. Various reasons are cited to support these points. More such research is necessary to determine the effect of different leadership styles on employees of various organizations.

References List

Derecskei, A., 2016. How do leadership styles influence the creativity of employees? Society and Economy in Central a2016nd Eastern Europe, 38(1), pp.103-118. Accessed on March 21, 2019 doi/abs/10.1556/204.2016.38.1.7

Nejati, M., 2010. Global business and management research: An international journal Vol. 2 No. 1. Universal-Publishers. Accessed on March 21, 2019. https://books.google.co.ke/books?id=sJvxJyMdmsC&pg=PA11&dq=how+democratic+leadership+stimulate+leadership+while+authoritarian+leadership+inhibits+creativity+among+employees&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiMmYeo3JPhAhWE1uAKHWwZD2MQ6AEIKDAA#v=onepage&q=how%20democratic%20leadership%20stimulate%20leadership%20while%20authoritarian%20leadership%20inhibits%20creativity%20among%20employees&f=false

Northouse, P.G., 2018. Leadership: Theory and practice. Sage publications. Accessed March 21, 2019. https://books.google.co.ke/books?id=TuyeBgAAQBAJ&dq=Northouse,+Leadership+8e.+%C2%A9+SAGE+Publications,+2019&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjjnNPz4ZPhAhXB1eAKHbYHDOYQ6AEIKDAA

Passmore, J., Peterson, D., and Freire, T., 2016. The Wiley-Blackwell handbook of the psychology of coaching and mentoring. New York, NY John Wiley & Sons 2016. Accessed on March 21, 2019. https://books.google.co.ke/books?id=6i9ECwAAQBAJ&pg=PA226&dq=mentoring+employees+to+increase+creativity&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwioyv7Y3ZPhAhUMmBQKHVAXDlQQ6AEIKDAA

Sy, T., Horton, C., and Riggio, R., 2018. Charismatic leadership: Eliciting and channeling follower emotions. The Leadership Quarterly, 29(1), pp.58-69. Accessed on March 21, 2019, https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2018-00347-001

Timby, B. K., & Smith, N. E. (2013). Introductory Medical-Surgical Nursing. Lippinc...