Leadership Behavior Case Study: Impact on Employees and Productivity

This case study examines the leadership behaviors of Ben and Phil, highlighting their contrasting approaches and impacts on an organization. Ben, a former plant manager, employed a participative leadership style, emphasizing communication and employee care. This approach fostered motivation but affected cost and production levels. Conversely, Phil adopted an autocratic leadership style, focusing on productivity and cost management, which led to increased output but demotivated employees and high turnover. The analysis suggests that directive leadership, incorporating the path-goal theory, would be a more effective approach. This involves setting clear goals, providing support, and fostering open communication to balance employee well-being with organizational objectives. The case study emphasizes the importance of adapting leadership styles to address specific organizational challenges and promote both productivity and employee satisfaction. Desklib offers similar solved assignments and study resources for students.

Running head: LEADERSHIP
Leadership behaviour
Name of the student:
Name of the university:
Author note

1LEADERSHIP
Answer to case question 1
Two leadership strategies are used in this case study. It has been observed that Ben
was a former plant manager who used to maintain a good communication with the employees
and took care of them. On the other hand, Phil was quite tough compared to Ben who did not
communicate with the employees and always gave concentration on the productivity and cost
management of the plant. However, it has been learnt from the study that both the leader has
to face certain problems during their job and this report has made an initiative to find out the
leadership behaviour of Ben and Phil. Further, the relationship behaviour has also been
highlighted here.
Considering all the activities of Ben, it can be stated that he has maintained the
rules of the participative leadership criteria. According to this leadership, it is required to
invite all employees at the time of making decisions related to company matters and represent
them as an ideal person in case of solving the problems and build up the team (Lam, Huang
and Chan 2015). The supporters of this leadership are encouraging the managers and the
employees to do a job appropriately through participation and draws effective implications on
the company. There are certain affirmative impacts of this leadership style (Grill et al. 2017).
The employees will accept the terms of the policies more rapidly and they will try to provide
their best to the company. Participative leaders motivate the employees so that they can be
morally liable for the success of the company. The employees will rely on the leaders in case
of solving any problem and the leaders are liable to provide more opportunities to the
employees regarding an increment to their income capacity.
On the other hand, the activities of Phil are a perfect example of autocratic
leadership skill. Autocratic leadership can be termed as authoritarian leadership. In this
leadership style, all the decisions of the company are confined in the hand of an individual

2LEADERSHIP
and he used to make choice according to their own rules and ideas (Chege, Wachira and
Mwenda 2015). They rarely take or accept any kind of work place related suggestions from
others. Under this leadership skill, the leader has a control over the whole group. Another
important point of the leadership is that the group members are not trust on the ideas of the
leader as they could not allowed to take any active participation in the decision making
process and the trends of the work becomes rigid in nature (Iqbal, Anwar and Haider 2015).
However, this management style is effective in case of situational management program.
Further, two different kinds of leadership models have been identified in this case
such as task-oriented model and relationship-oriented model. The former one has focussed on
the performance to achieve a standard and the later one is concentrating on the motivation
and well being of the employees and other members. Considering the case study, it can be
stated that the activities of Ben has come under the purview of relationship-oriented model
and the activities of Phil has come under the criteria of task-oriented model.
Answer to case question 2
It has been learnt from the case study that both Ben and Phil had followed up their
own leadership approach during the course of employment and both of them had to face
certain troubles regarding the same. During the management period of Ben, the employees
were motivated but the cost and production level got affected. On the other hand, during the
course of Phil, the production level and occupational cost of the company has been increased
but the employees got demotivated and resigned from their respective post. These affects the
organisational structure of the company and company has to face great dilemma for replacing
new employees at the position of experienced employees.
However, the company needs a person or manager who can deal with both the
problems and can take all the effective measures for the betterment of the company. Directive

3LEADERSHIP
leadership is the most appropriate approach in this effect. It provides support to the
employees, motivated them for perform their duties in proper way and also provide
suggestion for performing the expected task (Mesu, Sanders and Riemsdijk 2015). The
leaders of this theory are helping the managers if the managers need any guidance. The
supporters of this leadership behaviour are defined their ideas and issues to the employees so
that these ideas could not be imposed on the employees as a burden and they feel free while
performing all those jobs. Under this leadership behaviour, certain theories have been
maintained by the leaders and one of such theory is path-goal theory. According to the
theory, the leaders are set up working goals for each employee and provide necessary
suggestions to achieve the goals in a proper way (Hwang et al. 2015). It has two positive
aspects: first, bonafide relationship will be made in between the leader and the employees and
secondly, the production of the company will be increased too.
The central pivot of the leadership behaviour is the Path-Goal theory. It plays two
different roles for the overall development of the company. It is working as a communication
medium in between the employees and the leader and it helps to identify all the workplace
potentiality with an intention to avoid the risks (Goswami et al. 2014). This model helps to
build up three leadership criteria such as directive, supportive and participative leadership
(Hirt 2016). This theory is more applicable here as it not only concentrates over the employee
related issues but on the target achievement process of the company also. The main problem
of the current company is to select the right approach to deal with the dilemma of both
productivity and stable employees. Therefore, considering the main dilemma and present
condition of the company, it can be stated that path-goal model should be applied in this case
and the leader should follow the rules of directive leadership.

4LEADERSHIP
Reference:
Chege, A.N., Wachira, A. and Mwenda, L., 2015. Effects of leadership styles on
implementation of organization strategic plans in small and medium enterprises in
Nairobi. Management and Administrative Sciences Review, 4(3), pp.593-600.
Goswami, A., Li, M., Beehr, T.A. and Goffnett, S.P., 2014, January. Path-Goal Leaders’
Behaviors and Subordinates’ Personalities: Resulting Subordinates’ Behaviors. In Academy
of Management Proceedings (Vol. 2014, No. 1, p. 11888). Academy of Management.
Grill, M., Pousette, A., Nielsen, K., Grytnes, R. and Törner, M., 2017. Safety leadership at
construction sites: the importance of rule-oriented and participative leadership. Scandinavian
journal of work, environment & health, 43(4).
Hirt, M.J.K., 2016. Path-Goal Theory of Leadership: Leadership and Public
Management. Global Encyclopedia of Public Administration, Public Policy, and
Governance, pp.1-6.
Hwang, S.J., Quast, L.N., Center, B.A., Chung, C.T.N., Hahn, H.J. and Wohkittel, J., 2015.
The impact of leadership behaviours on leaders’ perceived job performance across cultures:
Comparing the role of charismatic, directive, participative, and supportive leadership
behaviours in the US and four Confucian Asian countries. Human Resource Development
International, 18(3), pp.259-277.
Iqbal, N., Anwar, S. and Haider, N., 2015. Effect of leadership style on employee
performance. Arabian Journal of Business and Management Review, 5(5).

5LEADERSHIP
Lam, C.K., Huang, X. and Chan, S.C., 2015. The threshold effect of participative leadership
and the role of leader information sharing. Academy of Management Journal, 58(3), pp.836-
855.
Mesu, J., Sanders, K. and Riemsdijk, M.V., 2015. Transformational leadership and
organisational commitment in manufacturing and service small to medium-sized enterprises:
The moderating effects of directive and participative leadership. Personnel Review, 44(6),
pp.970-990.