Leadership Essay: An Analysis of Graeme Hart's Leadership Approach

This essay provides an in-depth analysis of Graeme Hart's leadership style, examining it through the lens of various leadership theories. The essay begins by defining leadership and exploring its evolution, before delving into Hart's background as a self-made businessman and leveraged buyout investor. It then links his approach to narcissistic, transformational, and charismatic leadership styles, highlighting key characteristics such as risk-taking, decision-making, and communication skills. Furthermore, the essay applies trait theory to understand Hart's leadership qualities, emphasizing the development of his skills through experience and education. It also contrasts leadership and management, discussing their differences and Hart's strengths and weaknesses in each area. The essay concludes by summarizing Hart's leadership approach and its impact on his success, while acknowledging the importance of effective management within his organization. This essay is available on Desklib, a platform providing students with valuable study resources.

Running Head: Leadership 0
Leadership Essay
Graeme Hart

Leadership 1
Leadership holds a different meaning in different scenarios. In general terms
leadership can be defined as the process in which an individual influences the behaviour of
the group to achieve a common goal (Northouse2015). According to the literature present on
leadership it is evident that leadership theories have evolved over the time but none of them is
completely. The reasons responsible for the changes in leadership concept are situations,
working environment, cultures, new laws, growing organisational complexities, context,
psycho- social development and information overload (Nawaz & Khan, 2016).Every leader
has its unique style of leadership. Style of every leader is guided by some or the other
leadership theory. Hart is the kind of person who has not given any interview to press of New
Zealand in about a decade. He has a family of 4 including a wife and two children. He can be
termed as self-made man. Today, Graeme Hart is the richest New Zealand's richest person
listed in the Forbes magazine (NZ Herald, 2017). He usually acquires underperforming
businesses that manufactures everyday products like water bottles, milk bottles, foils and
paper (Forbes, 2017). He is the owner of Rank Group Investments Ltd., Carter Holt Harvey
Ltd. and Reynolds Group Holdings Ltd (Bloomberg, 2016). He is the kind of person who
generally prefers to stay away from the lime light. He does not like to make frequent public
appearances. He is a leveraged buyout investor who does not prefer to share the risk as well
as the returns with shareholders. He solely takes the responsibility of risks and rewards.
Further discussion will include detailed analyses of the leadership style of Graeme Hart
(Hunt, 2010).
Leadership style of Hart can be linked to various theories of leadership. He can be
termed as a narcissistic leader. It is kind of leadership where the leader keeps his needs at first
priority. He acts dominant, arrogant and hostile (Braun, 2017).The research shows that these
types of leaders have both positive and negative impact on the organisation. Some leaders
from the history such as Napoleon, Franklin Delano Roosevelt and Mahatma Gandhi
displayed this type of leadership. This factor can also be seen in the leadership style of Hart
as he himself takes the control of the situations. He does not like to share risks or rewards
with the stake holders. He usually invests in projects which lack leadership and emerges as
the leader for those. These leaders are perceived to be skilled orators and creative strategist.
The problem with such type of leaders is that they lack empathy and are poor listeners. Most
of the leaders belonging to this category provide negative results because they are always
involved in controlling others. The results can be positive if the leaders work for themselves
(Maccoby, 2004).
The leadership style of Graeme Hart also has the resemblance with the
transformational theory of leadership. This theory explains how leaders of that particular
style affect the organisational performance. This is a style characterised by motivating the
followers or subordinates to achieve something extraordinary. He has few characteristics of
transformational leadership but his style cannot be regarded entirely as transformational style
leadership. The basic qualities that of a transformational leader that hart possess are always
willing to take right risk, capable enough to take difficult decisions, self-management,
internal motivation, proactive in nature and he has the ability to set the goals of his

Leadership 2
organisation concise and realistic. His style of leadership cannot be completely termed as
transformational because he does not have the characteristic of sharing organisational
consciousness, not a very active listener and sometimes he fails keep his ego on check.
Another style which can relate to the leadership style of Graeme Hart is Charismatic
leadership. The word charisma describes the special or extraordinary gift that is possessed by
only few individuals (Northouse, 2012). This style basically relies on two factors charm and
persuasiveness. Charismatic leaders carry a powerful personality that attracts followers. They
possess some extraordinary qualities that are difficult to pin down and inspire other to work.
They do exert any kind of undue pressure on the followers but their self-image carries the
charm that automatically attracts the followers. This concept involves three basic elements
vision or vision, extraordinary qualities and recognition (Avolio and Yammarino, 2013). As
charisma is also an important element of transformational leadership therefore both
transformation and charismatic styles are related to each other and also share some common
characteristics. Major qualities or characteristics of charismatic leader are visionary, ability
to inspire the trust, excellent communication skills, full or energy and enthusiasm, tactful in
dealing different situations, action oriented and have the ability to make the followers feel
capable (Dubrin, 2015).Graeme Hart possess an effective blend of all these characteristics.
Therefore his style can be attributed as charismatic and outspoken.
Based on the analysis of leadership style of Hart, trait theory can be applied to explain
him better as a leader. Trait theory states that individual is a leader because of certain
characteristic that he / she possess, these characteristic may be inborn or developed over the
time. There is a set of certain intellectual, physical and intellectual traits that draws the
difference between leaders and non-leaders. According to this theory the personnel
characteristics of leader are major source of leadership success. It can be seen in the life of
Graeme that he was not an inborn leader. After school he worked as panel beater and tow
truck driver. Experience of various fields helped him to acquire certain characteristics. His
MBA degree from Otego University also helped him to develop his leadership traits. The
distinguishing characteristics of Hart that helped him to succeed as the leader are cleverness,
tactful, conceptually skilled, decisive, risk taking ability, alert to external environment,
persuasive, self-confident and dominant. The key characteristic of Hart is that he takes the
responsibility of his decisions. He proactively takes the risk and also does not make anyone
liable for negative outcomes. At the same time he does not shares the rewards with others for
the risk that he has taken.
Leadership and management are two related but different concepts. There is a thin
line of difference between a leader and manger. Some common differences between them are
discussed here. Leaders have a unique personality whereas mangers do not have this kind of
personality. Managers try to mimic the style and behaviours of others. Leaders do not try to
fit into others shoes they have their own style whereas mangers display the learned
behaviours. Leaders are innovative an act as agents that bring changes. Managers work
within the set procedures rules and regulations. Leaders try out change if it doesn’t works;
managers are consistent only with the best practices that work. Leader creates a vision for
followers to pursue whereas managers set goals for employees to achieve. Leaders inspire the

Leadership 3
followers to work towards a vision. They work to turnout vision to reality. The want their
followers to be part of something bigger and extraordinary. Leaders realise that working in
teams for common vision can bring results as compares to individuals striving for personal
objectives. Manager does not set long term visions they focus on setting goals for short terms.
They measure the employee performance through those goals and objectives. Leaders are risk
takers whereas mangers are often regarded as risk takers and mangers are regarded as
controllers of risk. Leaders are always willing to take risk even if it leads to failure. They
believe failure as stepping stone for success. Managers do not believe in taking risk, they
always work to minimise risk. They tend to control or avoid the risk or problems rather than
embracing them. There is broad difference between thinking process of leaders and
managers. Managers think from a narrow perspective whereas leaders think from the broad
and long term perspective. Leaders are motivated towards achieving long terms goals.
Managers need rewards or acknowledgements at regular intervals, for maintaining motivation
towards the goal. Leaders are the one who build a kind of relationship with people whereas
managers build process and systems for the people (Arruda, 2016).
From the above stated differences it is clear that leader and manger are different from
each other in various aspects. Now the question arises that whether a good leader can be good
manger or not. G of Graeme Hart is a good leader but does he have the managerial efficiency.
Being a good manger and a good leader both are different things but to take organisation to
the heights both are required good leadership and good management as well. To be successful
in long run an individual must have the passion to make improvements to the organisation
and must be capable enough to drive the efforts towards the final stage (Sriperambuduru,
2014). It is usually possible that a good leader can turn a good manager but opposite is not
possible. Hart is good leader but not a good manager. According to an article of Forbes
magazine both leadership and management require different skills. There are very few people
who have mastered both the arts. It is okay for the leaders, not to be good managers. Leaders
just need to realise the importance of the good management in the organisation. They just
need to assign value to the discipline of management (Clark, 2013). Hart himself is good
leader and has realised that the importance of the good management. He has professionals for
the management in the same way like accounting, marketing, production etc. He takes the
major decisions himself, takes risk and bring about changes. But those changes and decisions
are supported by framework of policies and practices taken by the management. It is evident
from researches that having bad manger can cost so much for an organisation. Having too
many managers is also harmful for the organisation. Therefore it is important for the
organisation to maintain the equilibrium in quantity and quality of managers (Beck and
Harter, 2014). Hart is a good leader and well aware about the kind and mangers that he needs
to keep in the organisation. Hart’s executive team is small in size and includes skilled &
talented people. Hart does not let his managerial inefficiency affect the organisation in any
way. His leadership capabilities take edge of the managerial inefficiency.
It can be concluded that that Graeme Hart is the inspiration to many. He is a self-
made man and reached to the position of richest man with continuous hard work and efforts.
His leadership style can be linked to narcissistic style, transformational style and charismatic

Leadership 4
style. He is a private person does not public appearances. He is the one who always keeps his
needs and perspectives at the first priority. His style can also be termed as transformational or
charismatic because he has the ability to motivate the followers. He masters the art of
communication. He is a risk taker and decision maker. He has that charm in his personality
that inspires others to take actions. Trait theory of leadership can be applied to the context of
Hart. He was not an inborn leader. His leadership skills developed over time while working
with the major leadership traits or qualities are cleverness, tactful, conceptually skilled,
decisive, risk taking ability, alert to external environment, persuasive, self-confident and
dominant. It is clear that leadership of Harr cannot be questioned. But when it comes of his
efficiency as a manager the things are different. Manger and leader both are different terms.
There are varieties of differences among them. Thus both of them require different skillset. In
various cases it is seen that good leaders are not mangers. Hart lacks managerial capabilities
but does not ignore the importance and need for good management in the organisation. He
has a team of talented management executives to perform the management task. He keeps the
major decision making concentrated to his hands but the task of following and implementing
those decisions to the management. His leadership abilities takes edge over managerial in
efficiencies.

Leadership 5
References
Arruda, W. (2016). 9 Differences Between Being A Leader And A Manager. The Forbes.
Retrieved from https://www.forbes.com/sites/williamarruda/2016/11/15/9-differences-
between-being-a-leader-and-a-manager/#78c42d6c4609
Avolio, B. J. and Yammarino, F. J. (2013). Transformational and Charismatic Leadership:
The Road Ahead. Emerald Group Publishing
Beck, R. and Harter, J. 2014. Why Good Managers Are So Rare. Harvard Business Review.
Retrieved from https://hbr.org/2014/03/why-good-managers-are-so-rare
Bloomberg, (2017). Company Overview of Carter Holt Harvey Limited. Retrieved from
https://www.bloomberg.com/research/stocks/private/person.asp?
personId=8683263&privcapId=875316
Braun, S. (2017). Leader Narcissism and Outcomes in Organizations: A Review at Multiple
Levels of Analysis and Implications for Future Research. Retrieved from
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5437163/
Clark, D. (2013). Why Great Leaders Make Bad Managers - and That's OK. The Forbes.
Retrieved from https://www.forbes.com/sites/dorieclark/2013/01/10/why-great-leaders-make-
bad-managers-and-thats-ok/#31dedbac69cc
Dubrin, A. J. (2015). Leadership: Research Findings, Practice, and Skills. Cengage Learning
Forbes, (2017). Graeme Hart. Retrieved from https://www.forbes.com/profile/graeme-hart/
Hunt, G. (2010). Lord of the deals. Retrieved from http://www.noted.co.nz/archive/listener-
nz-2010/lord-of-the-deals/
Maccoby, M. (2004). Narcissistic Leaders: The Incredible Pros, the Inevitable Cons.
Retrieved from https://hbr.org/2004/01/narcissistic-leaders-the-incredible-pros-the-inevitable-
cons
Nawaz, Z. A. K. D. A., & Khan_PhD, I. (2016). Leadership Theories and Styles: A Literature
Review. Leadership, 16.
Northouse, P. G. (2015). Leadership: Theory and practice. Sage publications.
Northouse, P.G. (2012). Leadership: Theory and Practice. SAGE Publications
NZ Herald, (2017). Billionaire Graeme Hart has climbed the rankings of Forbes magazine's
richest people in the world. Retrieved from
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11822168

Leadership 6
Sriperambuduru, M. R. (2014). Can one be a good leader without being a good Manager?.
Retrieved from https://www.bayt.com/en/specialties/q/115791/can-one-be-a-good-leader-
without-being-a-good-manager-please-share-your-valuable-comments/