Browse Tag: Leadership Styles

Leadership Styles related academic content.

Mark Elliot Zuckerberg and Ellen Johnson Sirleaf Leadership Styles

My chosen leaders are Mark Elliot Zuckerberg and Ellen Johnson Sirleaf. On the first male leader, Mark Elliot Zuckerberg was born on May 14th 1984. Mark is an American internet entrepreneur, programmer as well as a philanthropist. He is the chief executive, chairman as well as a co-founder of the famous social networking website known as Facebook. He is one of the most successful business men in the business market as his net worth stands at US$52 billion. This is as of today, 8th May 2016. This leader depicts the trait theory of leadership as he shows various traits as a leader. He is very ambitious, hardworking and a go getter. This is shown when he was so determined for greatness as he was able to create the social website in his campus room (Harvard dormitory rooms) with the help of his friends. They were able to spread this website to other campuses and it spread so rapidly with over billion users by the year 2012. His determination is also depicted when he was able to withstand several legal disputes which were initiated by some of his colleagues who claimed a share of the profits with the contribution they claimed to have made. He also showcased integrity when he and his wife decided to give a bigger part of their wealth in their course of their lives to “advancing human potential and promoting equality”. This as they say, is in the spirit of the giving pledge.

Ellen Johnson Sirleaf is the 24th president of Liberia. She is still the current president of Liberia. She served as a finance minister under the reign of President William Tolbert which lasted for only two years, 1979-1980. She showed perseverance when she came second in the 1997 presidential elections and she vied again in 2005 and won. She is the first ever female head of state to ever been elected in Africa since time immemorial. She was awarded the Nobel Peace prize together with Tawakkol Karman of Yemen and Keymah Gbowee of Liberia. These women were recognized for what is termed as their “non-violent struggle for the safety of women and for women’s rights to full participation in peace-building work.” She was as well listed as the 70thmost powerful woman in the entire universe, an award that was given by Forbes. She has expressed expertise in her job by leading Liberia in the most effective way. This thus attributes to the power and influence theory. As a public leader, she has to show clearly that she has authority over others under her government. She uses personal power and not alternative power and this translates to her effectiveness.

These two leadership theories mentioned above that have been related to the selected leaders have some similarities as well as differences. The trait theory which is also referred to as dispositional theory is an approach that is used to study the personality of humans particularly leaders. The trait theory is interested primarily in the measurement of the traits which can as well be termed as habitual patterns of thought, behavior as well as emotion. Traits are considered to be stable over a long period of time and are may only differ among individuals(Derue, Nahrgang, Wellman, & Humphrey, 2011). For example, some people might be shy while others are outgoing. These influence behavior.

According to the trait theory, traits are the external behaviors that in most cases emerge from the things that are ongoing in our minds. It is the internal processes and beliefs that are necessary for one to achieve the effective leadership (Derue et al2011).

The power and influence theory on the other hand takes quite a different approach. As much as the trait approach looks at the trait of a person to define who a leader is, this theory looks at the different ways that a leader can utilize power as well as his/her influence so as to get things done in the right way (Nohria & Khurana, 2013). They thus look at the styles of leadership that may result thereafter. This theory highlights that there exists five forms of power. Among these, there are three types of positional power. These include coercive, legitimate as well as reward power. There are two sources of personal power, these include referent and expert power. These can be a person’s personal charm and appeal.

This theory suggests that it is much better to use personal power other than alternative power and that people should work extremely hard so as to build expert power.

The two leaders named above Mark and Ellen depict the two leadership theories respectively. These two theories have made them effective leaders in their different ways of operation. For Mark Zuckerberg, it is clear that throughout his leadership and even as he is still a leader, he has not had an issue with gender interfering with his leadership. As seen earlier, his past colleagues who claimed to have made some contributions to the formation of the famous website were fighting him so as to get some shares of the profits that he was making. They may have made contributions but Mark was responsible for the success of the site as he put in more effort to ensure its success. His present subordinates are however supportive as they help in improving the site in all ways possible. This is evident as the site has been seen to have experienced several changes over a period of time which is meant to make the site better for its users.

For Ellen on the other hand, her election as the first female president in Africa has brought several issues on the. This is because in Africa, most people have had the idea for the longest time that women are inferior and that they should not be in the position of leadership. Most of the people especially in the opposition have had various issues with her leadership as they expect her to be nothing but perfect, something that is not possible for any human. They thus try hard to find so many problems with her leadership. This has not however affected her ability to lead as her effectiveness is clearly seen. This is because she managed to complete her first term of leadership successfully and has set in to serve in the second term after a successful win in the 2011 elections. Most of her subordinates are however in support of her leadership and they try to offer help and advice where needed.

Mark Zuckerberg depicts the transformational style of leadership. This, as it happens, is one of the most effective leadership styles in business. As a leader, Mark has depicted this style of leadership as he shows high integrity as well as emotional intelligence. This can be seen when he and his wife made a choice to give their wealth over the years in what they termed as “The Giving Spirit”. He inspires his team members as he is expecting them to deliver nothing but the best and that is what the team members have tried to do by all means.His conflict resolution mechanism is one that needs to be emulated. This is because he did not choose to fight back at his colleagues when they pulled out legal issues against him. His efficient leadership is what has led to the productivity of his business.

Ellen on the other hand depicts the democratic style of leadership. As a public leader, she has to be very aware of the decisions that she makes. In this case for example, she is the one who is responsible for final decision making but also ensures that she involves others in the lower positions as well as her advisors in the decision making process.

Both these two styles of leadership have their strengths as well as weaknesses.  The democratic style of leadership has the following strengths. It leads to an increase in production. When the leader communicates effectively, they ensure that the workers are kept aware of the happenings in the organization and thus they are interested in the production of more output thus increase in productivity. Secondly, the workers as well as the subordinates are involved in the decision making and thus this leads to increased satisfaction. Finally, the workers and the subordinates as well get a chance to utilize all their capabilities(Bhatti, Maitlo & Shaikh, 2012).

Despite these, they also have their weaknesses. The power is not centralized in this situation. This leads to the following drawbacks. As the authority in this case is decentralized the executives who are less competent cannot be used and thus people may lose chances because of this. Secondly, in this kind of leadership, several people are involved in decision making and thus this might lead to delay in the decision making process. Finally, this type of leadership style can in most cases appear indecisive. During a crisis for example, the leaders are expected to be very directive which is not what happens in democratic leadership.

For the leaders who depict the transformational style of leadership, have their own strengths as well as weakness. For example the transformational leaders create the best mentors and thus leads to innovative waves in the particular business. Secondly, these leaders are hardworking and depict good qualities. They are thus able to arouse some emotions among the workers which motivates them to work harder and even beyond the framework. Lastly, it also forms some new expectations in their followers since these leaders are proactive(Braun, Peus, Weisweiler, & Frey, 2013). On the other hand the leaders might have some weaknesses as not being able to achieve their expectations as well as the force of character and thus are unable to achieve. Some leaders may also be unable to have this character and thus leading their leadership to drawn at the edge. Finally it is based on the ability of the leader to inspire the workforce to ensure they do their best in the job which at times may not be applicable.

One strength that could influence me to become a good public leader is that I at all times ensure that I have undertaken all the duties with all the strictness and caution that it deserves and thus am able to ensure that the final output is close to flawless if not flawless at all.

Download full sample paper or order a unique paper at an affordable price.

Bill Gates Leadership Styles Essay

Bill Gates has had success in the computing world and is a leader that I will focus on this paper. His achievements are great especially in technology and its advancement together with the work of charity globally. He has significantly defined leadership in that he is one of the most successful businesspersons having a large enterprise, which he left to manage the Melissa and Bill Gates Foundation, which is one of the largest Charity foundations in the world. As a successful entrepreneur cum billionaire, he helped his company grow towards being one of the successful companies associated with computer devices. He helped groom his organization by used tough tactics in his meetings and ensuring that the managers were doing their jobs. Any great organization has great leadership because the leader focuses on the where the company is going and collaborates with other people on the various decisions that need to be made to reach there (Du et al., 2013). Bill Gates as a leader has been at the center of the success of Microsoft Corporation. He had driven his managers in making decisions that had been instrumental in the success of the corporation and had mostly not stagnated when failures occurred.

He helped revolutionize the computing industry and further provide operating systems that have been used in many computing devices produced by other companies like Dell, Hewlett, and Packard, IBM, Toshiba, Acer among many others. As such, he has influenced the way computers are made and as a leader, he has shown dynamism and learning capabilities in case of failures or competition from firms like Apple, which is a major competitor to Microsoft.  He helped come up with foundational programs in computers like MS-DOS and Basic. Bill Gates in his ventures in computer inventions and innovations has created many devices that have changed the computing industry largely. Bill Gates as a leader has exhibited great passion and steadfastness in pursuing his goals in the computing industry. He is a leader who mostly learns from his mistakes and does not look at failures as obstacles but as challenges. Therefore, he has shown himself to a person who is ready to learn from mistakes and make the best out of them. As such he has taken the failures to be stepping-stones and eye-openers to other ways that he can use to win over the market. Bill Gates usually looks at  the future in close to ten years and not in two years, as such he does not overestimate short changes that are short term but he looks at a wider picture. Gates engages in charity events throughout the world where he helps needy communicates through his Melissa and Gates Foundation. Gates is thus a unique leader who has the people’s interest at hearth and focuses on ways he can improve their lives through the various devices his company makes and sharing of information to benefit others.

Bill Gates is a transformational leader who mostly looks out for the best in his employees (Avolio & Yammarino, 2013). He has led the Microsoft Corporation into success especially in inputting various strategies that drive the employees towards exploiting their potential to their maximum. As such Bill Gates has invested in increasing the potential of his workforce while at the same time ensuring that the products made suit the needs of the customers. Bill Gates was from a family that greatly encouraged him to be independent in his thoughts and the autonomy to pursue what he wanted in life. As such, from his young age, leadership traits were inculcated in him, and he had the foresight to pursue his passion for computers, which has greatly benefited him and the world in general. The passion helped him not to give up in times of adversity and therefore as a leader, he has weathered many storms. Having a passion as a leader significantly contributes to the success of achieving success especially when employees are included in helping achieve the success.

Download full sample essay on Bill Gates Leadership Styles or order a unique paper on a leader you admire.

Leadership Styles, the Employee engagement, and HRD – Integrative Research Paper

Introduction

The success of any organization highly depend on the workers contribution to the organization. Workers act as the most important stakeholders in an organization. However, their performance is highly influenced by the form of management provided to them. To ensure effective operation of workers, an organization need to embrace the best form of leadership which will promote trust, commitment and vigor among the employees. This increases the level of job satisfaction and workers involvement to their daily operations. This eventually nurtures workers engagement, an aspect that is highly associated with high workers performance. Based on this information, this paper focuses on developing a deeper understanding of workers engagement and what facilitate its development. It also aims at establishing the relation between transformational leadership and the development of workers engagement and finally, identifying various conceptual model developed to demonstrate the relation between workers engagement and transformational leadership. This will be done by conducting a literature review form credible journals related with work engagement and transformational leadership. The paper will be reporting on the literature finding on the two topic and how transformational leadership influences the development of the workers engagement.

Research Findings

Workers Engagement

Engagement is defined as personal satisfaction and involvement with work and also individual work enthusiasm. Engagement defines the intimate involvement with work and the work experience framework. When workers are engaged, they are said to be emotionally linked to others as well as cognitively vigilant to the team direction. Engagement takes place when workers are aware of what to anticipate, contain the resources to handle their work, take parts in chances for feedback and growth, and fell that they significantly contribute to the organization. Engaged workers have consistently demonstrated that they are more profitable, healthier, productive, safer, and less probable to leave their jobs or employer. However despite of this great revelation, only 30 percent of the world workforce is approximated to be engaged. Over 60 percent of the world workforce report to work, at emotionally, ambivalent and best uninvolved with their tasks. It is approximated that this gap of engagement cost the economy of the United States over $300 billion dollars every year in lost efficiency. Regrettably, workers engagement appears to be on a progressive decline. Irrespective of the low quantity of engaged workers, leaders of organizations rate workers engagement among the top most organizations priorities (Batista-Taran et al., 2009).

Workers engagement refers to the level in which worker commitment which include bot intellectual and emotional exists with regard to accomplishment of vision, mission, and work of the organization. Engagement can be noted as ownership heightened level where every worker wants to do everything they can for the advantage of their external and internal customers, and the entire organization success. Engaged employees go for an extra mile from the basic job. Therefore, they can easily assist a company in achieving far beyond its expectation. An engaged worker provides her or his firm 100 percent efficiency. Therefore, when workers are positively and effectively engaged with their company, they create an emotional link with the company. Thus, workers engagement acts as a barometer to establish the relation an individual has with the employer or the organization. It involves developing the passion among acquaintances to do work far beyond the anticipated (Truss et al., 2013).

According to Swathi (2013) there are five levels of workers engagement. They include the engaged, almost engaged, hamsters and honeymooners, burners and crash and finally the disengaged. Engaged level refers to happiest and highly productive employees that are typified by discretionary commitment and effort. Almost engaged level refers to employees that are comparatively contented with their work and reasonably productive. This group can be promoted into engaged level based on the effort in which an organization can employ. Hamsters and honeymooners level involves workers that are highly satisfied with their working position, compensation, and the employing organization. However, they still offer low level of organization success contribution. The period spent in this level could be temporal based on the organization effort to enhance in the high growth of the organization’s engagement level.

The crash burners’ stage involves workers who are highly productive, maximally contribute to the organization success, but are unhappy with their individual success. These employees can easily shift to disengaged employees since they do not have self-commitment. The disengaged level involves workers with high discontentment levels and negative view on the approaches employed by the company. However, this is not the only classification of employees, according to Truss et al. (2013), employees can be classified into three groups that include disengaged, not engaged and engaged. In their explanation, engaged workers highly suitable for attainment requirements of the organization, while disengaged workers are very unsupportive and they attempts to diminish fame of an organization by injecting co-workers with negativism. On the other hand, not engaged workers are not disengaged, however, they simply demonstrates low passion and employ less energy. They normally spend time without making any achievement or accomplishment. It has also been noted that engaged workers can gradually change to disengaged while workers with low engagement level can easily be supported to attain the engaged level by providing them with the right resources (Bhuvanaiah & Raya, 2014).

According to Ghadi et al. (2010) engagement level of employees’ raises when there is a positive association between workers and their immediate supervisor. It has been revealed that work engagement tends to be founded on aspects that include association they share with their managers. Irrespective of this assertion, workers claim that their immediate supervisors lack essential behaviors or skills to make then improved engaging leaders. Research figures according to Ghadi et al. (2010), demonstrates that only 28 percent of supervisors play a duty in subordinates engagement, while over 70 percent of the workers acknowledge that their recognition by managers is the main engagement component. These disturbing statistics stands for a serious organizations issues since workforce engagement can never be attained if leaders lack behaviors and skills needed to create improved workers engagement level at work.

Employee engagement can be developed in any organization. According to Truss et al. (2013), there are strategies that can be employed to enhance employee engagement in an organization. These strategies include career development, workplace learning, and organizational development interventions. The evaluation of organizational development cab be grouped into three key themes that include progressively utilizing and collecting workers engagement data, for systems and economic gain, employing strategies of communication that enhances meaning and finally promoting accountability of employees via development systems and inclusive performance. Human resource development literature on engagement of employee and learning at the workplace is centered in two areas that include management training and individual worker development. In the development of individual employees, the organizations offer chances for learning informal and formal ways by offering indirect and direct resources and support. On the other hand management training is regarded as workplace initiative of learning to develop managers with particular abilities, training, skills and knowledge which initiates development (Karanges et al., 2013).

Engagement in a work environment can also be managed via managing stress, promoting well-being of workers, and facilitating self-management. Past researches regarding workers engagement demonstrated that a number of organization practices of communication enhances employee engagement and communication. Literature has deeply emphasized on the need for communication between the employees and their supervisors. Consistent and clear communication is necessary to attain employee engagement. Moreover internal communication is very important for employee engagement attainment. To promote the sense of commitment and belonging among the employees, managers should consider it critical to share open and reliable communication with their workers. Communication also assist workers to understand the organization goals effectively. In this case, manager should consider focusing on internal communication, and leadership communication (Mishra et al., 2014).

Transformational Leadership Style and Employee Engagement

Leaders are referred as the persons in the organization that set the culture and tone of the organization. Leadership on the other hand is the process in which a person influences a group of persons to attain the organization goals. According to Bayram and Dinc (2015), an effectual leader has the aptitude to influence followers to attain the organization goals. Unlike a manager who creates consistency and order, a leader initiate change and workers motivation. Leaders have personal values that enable them to develop the association between them and their follow. Although there are different leadership theories which defines styles, traits and characteristics of different leadership styles and leaders, this paper will focus on transformational leadership and its influence to workers engagement.

Transformational leadership refers to a process that takes place when one or more individuals are involved with others in a manner that followers and leaders raise uplift each other to higher molarity and motivation levels. The transformational leadership contains four dimensions that include idealized influence that deal with creating trust and confidence, stimulating motivation that deals with inspiring the whole organization, intellectual stimulation that entails changing and arousing followers’ problems awareness and their ability to handle the problems, and finally personalized considerations that engages responding to the unique, specific requirements of followers to guarantee they are included in the organization transformation process.

Transformational leaders are frequently highly known and visible for their energy and passion is all their work aspects. They use a considerable amount of their time communicating with followers and searching for new initiatives which add value to the future of their team. They empower and motivate their follower, frequently going beyond short-term goals by centering on higher order intrinsic requirements. Leaders influences effectiveness of an organization via their followers. Leaders can contain a high effect on involving workers in the organization. Transformational leadership according to Bayram and Dinc (2015), emerges as a form of leadership which fosters the employee engagement development. It alters the manner in which followers perceive themselves from secluded persons to large group members. When followers perceive themselves as a part of collective group, they tend to embrace group goals and values, and this improves their motivation to add to the greater good.

Transformational leadership offers an inspiring goals vision which can assist overcome narrow factionalism and self-interest in organizations. They summon broader and new energies among followers. According to Soieb et al. (2013), workers who containing positive connections with their managers contain increased engagement levels. Moreover, the utilization of transformational form of leadership results to increased job satisfaction and organization commitment. In addition, according to Soieb et al. (2013), leaders who centers on trust development and relationship building increase levels of engagement. Transformational leaders are perceived as mutual support for a shared purpose which is the collective organization good and not as power figures. In this regard, transformational leaders contain the ability to directly influence levels of engagement of their workers, and are in a position of meeting the work and human needs of their workers, a dividend of a very empowering and unique style.

The theory of transformational leadership has changed as a motivational process effect. Motivational effect of this kind appears when leaders develop and change profession and personal characteristics of followers by demonstrating for forms of behaviors. The four identified behaviors include idealized influence that defined the leader’s level of aptitude to create devotion and loyalty without any regard for personal interests that assists followers be related with leaders. The second one is inspirational motivation which engages leaders’ aptitude to generate vision in a manner which appeals to followers and transform them into essential part of the organization. The third form is intellectual stimulation that entails ability of leaders to stimulate effort of followers to be creative and innovative via taking computed risks, questioning assumptions, and seeking followers input. The last one is the individualized considerations which refers to the level wherein leaders act as coach or mentor and play unique attention to differences of followers.  The four characteristics permit followers to get the foundation to change, to eliminate their negative behaviors, and to promote their potential. This boost followers’ productivity and increase their rate of success (Ghadi et al., 2010).

Contemporary Leadership and Employee Engagement Conceptual Frameworks

There have been a number of conceptualized models that can be used to explain the relation between effective transformational leadership and workers engagement. According to Ghadi et al. (2010), transformational leadership can be enhanced by employing four forms of behaviors advocated by the transformational leadership theory. These four behaviors that include idealized influence, inspirational motivation, intellectual stimulation, and individualized considerations, also known as four I’s assist in development of a conducive work environment and significant work. This initiates the development of positive behavior which include loyalty, trust and respect among the followers. The new development behaviors make workers change their perception on job and begin seeing work to be more meaningful. This initiates the sense of obligation, where followers feel indebted to reciprocating in a manner of being part of the work. This eventually initiate the development of workplace engagement which is characterized by absorption, dedication and vigor.

 

Engagement is also highly related to job satisfaction. Only workers with high job satisfaction can consider to be engaged to the work they do in an organization. Transformational leadership has highly been associated with job satisfaction. According to Byram and and Dinc (2015), there is actually a strong positive correlation between workers’ job satisfaction, and transformational leadership. Transformational leadership is also emphasized as the best technique to identify supervisor and employee interaction. It contains the main duty for being a part of stimulating and fostering information exchange for development of highly satisfied and hence highly engaged workers in an organization. This contributes to the organization accomplishment. Byram and and Dinc (2015) developed the following conceptual model to demonstrate the relation between transformational leadership in fostering job satisfaction and hence initiating workers engagement. This framework is demonstrated below: with this model, an organization can easily attain workers engagement.

Similarly, Breevaart et al. (2014), also proposed another conceptual model demonstrating how transformational leadership translate into workers engagement. According to the researcher application of transformational leadership on daily basis assist in gaining daily autonomy at the rate of 10% and daily social support at the rate of 33%. In addition, offering daily reward to workers based on their performance will initiate the development of autonomy by 10% and social support by 16%. However, the employment of management by exception will reduce social support by 3% and autonomy by 6%. In this case, to maximize in the development the daily autonomy and social support which initiate the development of work engagement, transformational leadership should be integrated with daily rewarding, resulting to workers engagement development

Summary and Implication of Results

According to the research, workers engagement is very beneficial to a company. It help in increasing the workers commitment and dedication to their daily operations. It initiates workers vigor and thus, enhancing their output. Workers engagement development is highly determined by the form of leadership adopted by an organization. An organization with effectual leadership will highly nature the development of workers engagement. Transformational leadership is highly credited for fostering workers engagement. With its ability to change the organization culture, it is easy to increase the job satisfaction, build trust and enhance the development of respect between the leader and the followers. Moreover, it enhances positive interaction that makes the workers to develop an emotional and intellectual relation with their jobs. This eventually results to the development of workers engagement.

Download full Integrative Research Paper on Leadership Styles, the Employee engagement, and human resource development  or order a plagiarism free paper at an affordable price. 

Google Inc CEO Larry Page Leadership Styles

Introduction

Google Inc. is a global technology firm that was founded in 1998 by Larry Page and Sergey Brin. The company headquarters are located at Mountain View, CA, in the United States.  The company business is basically focused around the main areas that include hardware and enterprise products, platforms and operating systems, advertising, and search. The company provides its services and products in over 100 languages and in over 50 nations, territories, and regions. The company mission is to organize the information of the world and make it universally useful and accessible. The company focuses on determined and smart workers. Since its formation, Google has managed to employ over 40, 000 workers worldwide, with a team of management that represents some of the most skillful technology experts in the industry. The company’s current CEO , who is also one of the company co-founder is  Larry Page (Google.com, 2014). This analysis Larry Page: The CEO of Google Inc.

Larry Page Background

Larry Page was born in 1973 in East Lansing, Michigan by parents who were both computer experts.  He did his engineering bachelor degree in Michigan University and later did his master degree in computer science in Stanford University. He together with his Stanford University schoolmate Brian created a search engine that would list results based on the page popularity. They later employed that idea to started Google Company in 1998, when Larry Page was pursuing his PHD in computer science. Page became the first Google CEO until 2001, where he became the president of the products. In 2004, Google held its first public offering making Larry Page and his co-founder billionaires. He returned to the CEO post in 2011 after Eric Schmidt who he handed over to in 2001. Larry is a trustee in the X PRIZE board, and he was voted in 2004 to the National Academy of Engineering (Biography.com, 2014).

Larry Page Leadership Style

Larry is a leader who cares more about innovation. He is constantly in the move to modify Google for the better. He contains an equal, open way of leading, encouraging his employees to take parts in idea development and sharing of any crazy ideas that come across their mind. He believes in quick decision making but a high level of efficiency in them. Beside this, he believes in smart workforce and thus, he always search for brilliant young graduates to join his team of intellectuals. He always encourages his employees to employ ability freely for development of the company. Larry philosophy is “developing new and unique things that do not exist and that have never been imagined”.  His leadership and philosophy aligns with the organization culture since one of the organization cultures is focusing on the ability rather than experience while hiring. The organization also employs open culture, where all are allowed to contribute through giving opinion or ideas for the development of new products. To facilitate this culture, employees are allowed to communicate freely to the top management and among them through email. Diversity and free interaction is one of the most emphasized organization cultures. This aligns well with Larry philosophy of developing new products since interactive, diverse environment encourages the combination of ideas from individuals with different world perspectives and different cultural background to create new and unique products (Burrows & MacMillan, 2011).

CEO Personal and Organization Values

Larry being the co-founder of Google Inc. he shares the same value with the company. He defined 10 values that guide him and the entire organization. These values include working with great people, making innovation the organization lifeblood, making working in Google fun, being actively involved to honor commitments, not taking success for granted, but act and think like an underdog with great humility. The sixth value is doing the right thing and avoiding evil, seven is earning user and customer respect and loyalty on daily bases, eight is sustaining long-term profitability and growth as the key to the organization success, nine is caring and supporting the community surrounding Google, and finally, aspiring to change and improving the world by aiming high, taking risks, and thinking big. Beside this, Page values young, brilliant innovative mind and he always work to promote young innovators from universities. He value honesty, hard work, and earning through genuine means. Respect is another Larry’s value; he regards respect to his workers, customers and all Google users. He values relation and thus, he chooses respect and humbleness even when he is documented in the top richest people in the country (Joshi, 2014).

The CEO Influence on the Organization Ethical Behavior

The CEO values determines the CEO behaviors toward the employees and the thus, the organization working environment. When a CEO has value that initiates behaviors that makes  employees to feel dominated, that encourage disrespect to any of the stakeholder or that encourage any form of fraud, the employees will also follow in that same  line. Moreover, when a CEO adopt values that can shows disregard to employees, customers or other organization stakeholders, this can be extended to his executive body, to the management and eventually to the rest of the company. Such values will create a state of disrespect to employees’ right, dictatorial kind of leadership, fraud either in the company or to the customers, and other form of immorality. However, in this case Larry has adopted positive values that direct others to respect one another, to employ their ability to create products that would allow the organization to earn genuine income, and to create a good working environment where everyone feels comfortable. These values guide the entire organization into observing ethical issues of the organization. With the CEO being strict on doing what is right, even the most mischievous employee will be certain of the discipline employment for unethical issues. Therefore, good values will promote the development of unethical environment that is free of immoral practices (Cengage.com, 2004).

CEO Greatest Strengths and Weaknesses

One of the greatest strength of Larry page is that he is introvert. According to Nobel (2010), introvert persons have been found to make great leaders in a proactive environment. This is because there are more probable to listen to, process, and employ ideas of an enthusiastic team. What makes Larry strong as an introvert is the fact that he employs a vibrant, young team, fresh from university with a lot of ideas that they are willing to share. To motivate this kind of a group in a practical environment, an introvert leader like Larry will be very viable. The second Larry strength is that he is an honest person who believes in earning from doing what is right and by employing the right technology. Honesty is a strong virtual in business. With honesty, a leader is able to create an ethical working force, good relation with customers, and other stakeholders. Moreover, honesty promotes customer retention and development of more customers from referral. The third Larry’s strength is good computer technology background. Larry was not a usual child; he was born and brought up by computer experts. His father was a pioneer in artificial intelligence and computer science and his mother was a computer programmer. Therefore, Larry interacted with intensive computer technology at early age. He could witness his father developing robots and his mother creating system. Therefore, Larry believe in technology is well founded and thus, he can easily follow his parent footsteps to achieve more. Beside this, Larry has well founded academic background for computers and computer technology and thus, he can easily aid in the development of the technology in the organization.

Larry greatest weakness is that his character and educational background does not give him any advantage manager-of- internal politics or salesman-in-chief. Larry lacks qualities required in public relationship and thus, task related to interaction with the public will be very hard for him. Being an introvert person, Larry is least likely to be a persuasive person. Moreover, some of Google previous employees and also some of the current employees claim that Larry is mostly rude in his talks. Thus, Larry will highly struggle with public relation related missions. Another Larry Page weakness is discipline. Page is known to dislike personal meetings or schedules and he is highly resistance to restraining on his time by others. Page exclusively focus on the inward part of the company, and cares less about other external entities. This may put Google on the sport, since there are external entities that highly influence the company’s performance. The last weakness is that Larry being the co-founder of the company may try to influence the company direction to what he had initially in mind. The company has already taken its turn and thus any such influences at this point may make it loss direction.

Qualities Results to the Success of Page Larry

Some of leadership quality that makes Larry Page successful is his innovative nature and taking note of small details. Larry believes in development of new unique products that have never existed. This makes him a risk taker in technology business. This nature is quite appropriate in technology business, since it allows him to invent new products and become more competitive and viable in the market. Page has a highly level of perseverance, a quality that helps him to work on a development patiently until it bears fruits. Page is also concise and quick. These qualities enable him to make quick decision regarding various matters and thus, saving the company from unnecessary losses brought about by delay in decision making. These qualities are also very essential in a technology company where the technology is changing very fast and thus, making the field very demanding and very competitive. The last quality of Larry is the fact that he likes working with a strong team and he always employ all measures to build a strong team.  Larry is a democratic leader who believes in giving people equal opportunities and a great working environment so as to be able to exercise their ability freely without interference. This has always enabled Google to share ideas and to develop new unique products within a very short period of time (Lester, 1975).

Communication and Collaboration, and Power and Politics Influence Google

Google has a culture of open relationship which means open communication and a high level of collaboration. This association has always helped the organization employees as well as management to work as a team and to share ideas and opinions in problem solving. Google has developed a café and an email where the organization employees and management can easily interact, share ideas, and solve problems. This open communication and collaboration has enabled the organization to develop a fun and great working environment where innovation and development of simple ideas is the order of the day. This has highly benefited the organization growth and expansion. Power and polities normally influences the economic activities of various organizations differently. Google previously never had a lot of involvement with politician. However, the company supported the last American general election by funding Barrack Obama’s campaign.

Download full sample paper on Google Inc CEO Larry Page Leadership Styles or order a plagiarism free paper at an affordable price.