Strategic Management and Leadership | Case Study

Running Head: MANAGEMENT 0
`
STRATEGIC MANAGEMENT
AND LEADERSHIP

MANAGEMENT 1
Introduction
In current dynamic and fast changing environment, there is an increasing pressure on
organisation of individuals in groups and teams to approach vague problems and form
innovation solutions, to what extent leaders can facilitate teams innovation outcomes and
processes has become a vital question for both practice and theory. A more pragmatic system
of promoting workplace creativity is to assemble an innovation team asked to come up with
ideas and improve unique aspect of the workplace (Kwan et al, 2018). Various theories and
research are also being emphasized uncovering essential procedures by which leadership can
boost innovation and creativity and therefore, holding and enhancing an autonomous work
environment together with building integration of ideas and solutions for fostering knowledge
sharing within the team. Individual leaders tasked with prominent innovation efforts – either
as that’s a part of their role or because they are accountable for the everyday management of
a particular innovation project.
Leaders have to be more responsible to accumulate teams and lead them to ideal
performance upshots. Furthermore, they should recognise the significance of taking on
differences in individuals and knows the ways to associate various factors in relation with
those differences so as to get the best consequences from the group. This is what nurtures a
workplace environment of constant progresses, initiative and innovation. Leaders need to
know how to raise an assurance from the group to cuddle an innovation mindset where each
employee studies to put on the variances that be present in one another for their own success
and that of the corporation (Anderson, Potocnik & Zhou, 2014).
Example and Case of Company
Innovation begins with those individuals who touch the business across all
departmental and functional spaces and leaders are those who can see, sow, develop and
share prospects. However, it is also necessary for the leader to just not address the importance
of innovation as creativity may also be described as the active process that is included in

MANAGEMENT 2
innovation. Considering the case of leading American multinational conglomerate
corporation i.e. 3M has successfully leveraged on creativity over the years to gain
competitive advantage in the market. According to the statement by 3M, they thrive on rich
and dynamic information exchange, exploring new technologies, sharing insights, elements
that empower its personnel to develop meaningful relationships amid themselves (Boh,
Evaristo, & Ouderkirk, 2014). In relation with this, innovation process at the company
involves creativity as collections, but not as individuals and this requires leaders to encourage
its employees at the company. In support with this, the company also opened an innovative
centre in Washington, where various employees and leaders at the facility operate openly,
thus allowing them to cooperate and to share information effectively.
Innovation and Creativity
Hughes et al (2018) use the terms innovation and creativity equivalently and the
differences between these two approaches might be more one of importance than of
substance. Furthermore, they have developed arguments about these terms; like they
showcased creativity as the production of valuable and rich ideas while innovation as the
production or adaption of rich ideas and implementation of these ideas in the workplace.
Sowden, Pringle & Gabora (2015) distinguish creativity as the thinking process that aids in
generating ideas, whereas innovation is the applied application of these ideas for the purpose
of meeting corporate purposes and aims. Creativity is highly essential for businesses and
corporates today, specifically when the markets depend upon cutting edge and advanced
technologies. Though, it is quite challenging also to apply creativity in the workplace as with
presence of diver skills sets and when big pressure holds to the leader to make them work
collaboratively in the team in different ways.
Considering the differences between these two concepts, Henker, Sonnentag & Unger
(2015) also stated that there is also a mediating role of employee creativity in translating
different leadership styles into employee innovative behaviour whereas, transformational
leadership styles effects employee innovative behaviour through employee creativity as
innovation demands personal involvement of the employees, as they have to use their
complete potential and put efforts beyond the expectations. Importantly, meanwhile
innovation at the corporate level is the result of leaders’ creative efforts and accomplishments
in organisations, it is necessary to understand the gaining of the effect of this in the form of