Chapter 2 REVIEW OF LITERATURE

A review of literature of all the three conceptualization categories (herein called as variablesdependent and independent) have been done based on the CF developed for the study of Organisational excellence. The dependent variable is Organisational excellence with three sub-variables as the main constructsGME, HRME, and OME. The two independent variables chosen are: Powerful Leadership with three subvariables (globalization issues; vision, mission and strategies; and leadership dynamism) and Performance Culture with three main sub-variables (HR policies and practices, competency mapping and team working). One of the major review objectives has been to get insights related to the linkages and the relationships of the variables and the subvariables of both the dependent and independent variables through intensive research of the literature. ORGANISATIONAL EXCELLENCE Excellence relates to best companies which have surpassed the best of the performance standards set by an Organisation in an industry. Three major approaches to Organisational effectiveness got developed in the West, namely Organisation development (OD), socio-technical systems, and human relations (Khandwalla 1992). All three have made inroads in developing societies; they integrate high Organisational performance with the well-being of the employees. The socio-technical systems approach seeks to relate and harmonise the social and technical aspects of the work (Trist 1981, cited in Khandwalla 1992). This approach originated at the Tavistock Institute in Britain, wherein the Organisation is viewed as an open system, that is open to external environmental influences. Changes within the Organisation are accomplished through action research. Organisation development (Beckhard 1969, Golembeiwski 1988). is both an approach to Organisational functioning and a kit of tools designed to increase the effectiveness of Organisations

18

The term excellence came to prominence with the book, In Search of Excellence by Thomas J. Peters and Robert H. Waterman in 1982, to which the New York Wall Street Journal cited as one of the rare books on management. Peters and Waterman, while they were project leaders on Organisational effectiveness, way back in 1977, set up two internal task forces at McKinsey and Companyone to review thinking on strategy and he other to go back to the drawing board on Organisational effectiveness. Their work was initially borrowed from the the idea expressed by Alfred Chandler, a business historian, who in 1962 said that structure follows strategy. In other words, a proper strategic plan evolves from the the right structure. In the period following World War II till about 1970, Chandlers advice was enough to cause (or maintain) a revolution in management practice that was directionally correct. However, Peters and Waterman later discovered that strategy rarely dictated structural solutions. In fact, crucial problems in strategy was that of execution and continuous adaptation: getting things done, staying flexible. Peters and Waterman worked to expand their diagnostic and remedial kit beyond traditional tools for business problem solving, which largely concentrated on strategy and structural approaches and focused to build some sort of major corporate capabilitythat is, to become more innovative, to be better marketers, to permanently improve labor relations, or to build some other skills that the corporation did not possess then. They finally concluded that any intelligent approach to organizing had to encompass, and treat as interdependent, at least seven variables: structure, strategy, people, management styles, systems and procedures, guiding concepts and shared values (i.e. culture). Subsequently, this popularly came to be known as the McKinsey 7-S Framework, where all seven variables starting with the letter S. Pascale and Athos (1981) assisted Peters and Waterman in their concept and also used it as the conceptual understanding for The Art of Japanese Management. Peters and Waterman after strengthening the conceptual understanding for the study of Organisational excellence undertook a full-blown research on the subject of excellencewhich was defined by them as continuously innovating big companies funded by McKinsey on an initially chosen 75 highly regarded companies. Finally, in-depth studies were carried out in more than 20 companies and in which eight attributes were identified that characterized excellent and innovative companies. They are (i) a bias for action, (ii) close to customer, (iii) autonomy and
19

entrepreneurship, (iv) productivity through people, (v) hands-on value driven, (vi) stick to the knitting, (vii) simple form, lean staff, and (viii) simultaneous loose-tight properties. The companies that were studied by Peters and Waterman (1982) had a preponderance of almost all eight attributes in some form or the other and were clearly visible and distinct. However, these eight attributes are conspicuously absent in most large companies today (Peters and Waterman 2005). 1 In another study, Waterman (1994) subsequently focused on fewer Organisations and looked at greater depths than looking on a large number of Organisations and relying on the perspective of top managers for determining attributes of excellence. A lot of time in this study was also spent in interviewing middle managers and frontline people. Many stories and quotes were generated from interviews, and these, along with observations and discussions helped in getting insights about inside realities. According to this study, Organisational arrangements made a difference in top performing companies. Heller (1997) reports that in business, Europe has lagged behind America and Asia. European companies have been slow to exploit new technologies and philosophies of Organisation and achievement. However, despite these shortcomings, these companies are fast on their feet, be they Finnish, British, German, French, Dutch, Swiss or cross-national. These are also flexible, adventurous, responsive and constantly improving. Leadership is being devolved, the management of radical change is taking centerstage, cultures are being reshaped and corporations subdivided. Organisations are becoming more fluid in the pursuit of maximum motivation, effective team working and constant renewal. Best companies, according to Tushman and Nadler (1996 p.136, cited in Common 2004), constantly innovate and change and the most innovative Organisation are highly effective learning systems. It can be said to be beyond Organisational effectiveness. Cameron (1980) lists four important categories for assessing Organisational effectiveness: achieving goals, increasing resourcefulness, satisfying clients, and improving internal processes (modified by Bramley 1986).
1

Authors note: Excellence 2003 maintains that they continue to stick to the identified eight attributes, though also fully aware that another researcher, looking at the same data may pick up a different set. According to them, these eight clearly describe whats different about top performers and the excellent companies live in their commitment to people and also seem to have developed cultures that have incorporated the values and practices of great leaders and sharing and living with them. All the growth in excellent companies has been internally generated and home-grown. 20

Public sector enterprises in India evinced interest in a study on excellence during the mideightees and the then Bureau of Public Enterprises (now Department of Public Enterprises) sponsored a research on the Management Excellence in Public Enterprises which was conducted by the Indian Institute of Public Administration, IIPA, New Delhi, in 1985. The study identified 20 high performing companies, 10 low performing enterprises and one turnaround company to find out what leads to achievement of excellence of Indian Organisations (Ram, IIPA, 1989). The study found out that through proper attention to men and Organisation, companies have been able to get best results in output, quality, cost and optimal utilization of resources and become highly regarded. Khandwalla (1990) in another study of excellent management in the public sector, provided interesting insights into the working of the Indian public sector and the findings challenge many of the stereotype views held about the public sector, viz., that it is overregulated, that it is incapable of professional management, or that it is destined to be sick. Khandwalla reported several examples of corporate excellence in the public sector besides also reporting growing rate of loss-making public enterprises beset with sloppy quality, rampant inefficiency, low productivity and government bureaucracy around the same time. Thus, in the late eighties, Indian Petrochemicals Corporation Ltd. (IPCL), owned by the GoI was the largest petrochemical company in the country, with a dominant market share in ethylene (basic material for petrochemical products) with high performance. Other examples of excellence included the State Bank of India (SBI), Petrofils Cooperative Ltd., etc. Examples of excellence among social development Organisations included the Comprehensive Rural Health Project, National Dairy Development Board (NDDB), Rural Education Programmes, Forestry, etc. Maheshwari (1980) studied the decision-making styles of a dozen Indian corporations half in the public sector and half in the private sectorand tried to relate decision styles to performance. Organisations that employed a participatory as well as an entrepreneurial mode of decision making were found to be performing better than those employing authoritarian and conservative mode of decision making. Paul (1982) studied six large, successful developmental programmes and found that successful programs invested heavily in a learning strategy. They started with one rather than many goals and later diversified and expanded in a phased manner. The Organisation structure was found to be
21

flexible to adapt to the overall strategy of the programmes. Ganesh (1980) studied six Indian academic institutions, all teaching management, with a view to finding out the relationship between institution-building processes and the performance of the institution. The study revealed that different groups of processes contributed to excellence on different performance indicators. For instance, strong recruitment, enculturation, regeneration, and redefinition processes resulted in superior performance on capability development; strong processes vis--vis choice of model, decision making, structure, etc., led to excellence in innovative thrust; and strong processes concerning choice of early leadership, leadership style, dissemination of information about the institution led to excellence in market or domain penetration. The common measures of effectiveness, both within Organisations and the Organisation as a whole, focus on the extent to which targets or goals are met, e.g., sales achieved, units produced, profit generated, quality parameters achieved, etc. In well-run Organisations, well developed processes are in place, such as those related to individual performance appraisals, periodic reviews by sections, departments, functions, etc. Assessment criteria can be elements like low labour/employee turnover, good teamwork, high job satisfaction, high motivation, high commitment, low absenteeism, low grievances, less disciplinary actions (Cameron, 1980, Bramley 1986, Redshaw 2000), low attrition, high engagement, etc. The review of literature will now focus on the three distinct types or sub-concepts of Organisational excellence. 1. General Management Excellence General management excellence referred to in this study relates to excellence in organic growth. Hess (2007) pointed out that excellence is not a matter of merely increasing in size and becoming big, but whether they have grown organically or non-organically. An Organisation with a high non-organic growth may have lesser faith and confidence in its own line of business and would also be lacking in passion. Vision and missions without passion can not lead to excellence. According to him, 70-75 percent organic growth and 25-30 percent non-organic growth is a good mix.

22

Khandwalla (1985), in a study of 75 corporate Organisations, identified a dynamic mode of management which he labeled the pioneering-innovative or PI mode. The study found out that high scoring managements were committed to pioneering novel, relatively sophisticated technologies, products or services; taking risks if the expected returns were high; creativity and innovation; and informality and adaptability. Khandwala (1992a) studied six different kinds of excellence: competitive excellence (sorely needed by third world commercial and industrial Organisations to catch up with global levels of efficiency, product quality and innovation); institutionalized excellence (important for those strategic Organisations and institutions that operate in relatively non-competitive environments with unstable leaderships); rejuvenatory excellence (ability to rise from near demise and flourish); versatile excellence (the capability to put up a good show on a wide range of partially conflicting indicators of excellence); creative excellence (the ability to innovate continuously and successfully); and missionary excellence (the capacity to perform a social mission or pursue an ideal exceptionally well). According to Khandwalla, public enterprises will have to match international standards of quality, efficiency and innovativeness and governmental bureaucracies will have to be much more innovative and responsive. Khandwalla (1992a) pointed out five productive keys to Organisational excellence: mission, vision of excellence, and core values; styles of management; strategic management; structure and systems; and Organisational renewal processes. Khandwalla extensively studied each of the five keys. Maheshwari (2007) pointed out that declining Organisations have to make a series of action choices for turnaround process. Effective action choices lead to improvement in performance in terms of productivity and resources and ineffective action choices worsen the situation. Khandwalla, (1992b) identifies four basic types of turnaround processes,

23

namely, surgical-reconstructive, surgical-innovative, non-surgical-innovative and nonsurgical-transformational. His analysis of 65 published turnaround cases indicates that domain initiative, cost-reduction and changes in top-management are some of the universal activities in the turnaround process. According to Maheshwari (2007), change in leadership, forming team at the top, change in strategy, retrenchment of assets and people, upgrading technology, financial restructuring, and Organisational change are some of the turnaround actions needed to be taken by Organisations (Maheshwari 2007). 2. Human Resource Management Excellence According to Mendenhall et al. (2007), business leaders of the present and future will need to possess international business skills par excellence in order to survive the chaotic world of international business. Human resource managers will face new unforeseen obstacles due to globalization. They have reported Big Five HR challenges in the present context of globalization for achieving human resource and Organisational excellence: enhancing global business strategy, aligning HR issues with business strategy, designing and leading change, building global corporate cultures and developing global leaders. Beechler and Bird (2007) have reported undertaking of researches on HRMs role in the design of business strategy, as well as its role as an enhancer of business strategy. They have found clear associations between strategies and human resource activities. Mendenhall et al (2007) also point out the largest globalization challenge of HR executives as anticipatory change changing before there is clear demand and lead, not lag the global strategic focus of the firm. Excellence in human resource management is of particular significance particularly in view of growing and unpredictable impacts and consequences of globalization. In the present day, achieving excellence requires Organisations to become global and in both cases, human resource management will be playing a pivotal role. HRM must be capable of providing pathway / roadmap to Organisations aspiring to become global and an Organisation which has become global, HRM must achieve excellence. Lengnick-Hall and Lengnick-Hall (2003, 2005) point out to HR at crossroads in many Organisations as one that can be outsourced automated and relegated to a secondary support role as they

24

have primarily considered themselves as deliverer of HR services. Continuing to operate along principles and methods that were effective in the industrial era will lead to the declining importance of HR function and an erosion of its ability to contribute directly to Organisational effectiveness. According to them a rethinking is required in respect of the roles of HR in the knowledge economy so as to have a large and direct impact on the success of the Organisation. According to Khandwalla (1992a), in a world of mediocrity and incompetence, human excellence acts like adrenalin. It dispels despair and galvanizes those who wish to do something worthwhile but are discouraged or intimidated by the odds against them. Human excellence comes in many forms: being best amongst competitors, doing much better than what one could in the past (where the competition is with ones own self, an example of a perfectionist), performing far better than a general standard, persisting and succeeding at a difficult task that can be accomplished only after a long haul, doing something unique, something no one has done before, etc. Dervitsiotis (2005) reports that developing human Organisations for sustainable excellence requires important adjustments in the way an Organisations nature is understood and behavior studied. Human Organisation has to be regarded more as a human entity. According to him, as a living system, human Organisation evolves over a period of time as a continually adaptive system. A traditional leaderships response to hold things steady to maintain the same strategy in the periods of rapid change can be disastrous. Pascale et al. (2001) argues that a state of equilibrium is death. Capra (2002) points out that a living system is made up of several components connected to form a network of relationships that can be looked from three different perspectives (form, processes and matter). Zaugg and Thom (2003) feel that establishment of implicit competencies in human resource management, Organisational development and knowledge management is necessary for getting better results from change initiatives. According to them, these competencies help to promote configurational model of change resulting into Organisational excellence. Zaugg and Thom (2003) studied different models of

25

Organisational excellence given by Peters and Waterman (1982), Zink (1998), Wenger (1999, cited in Zaugg and Thom, 2003), Wilmes and Radtke (2000, cited in Zaugg and Thom, 2003) and proposed three implicit Organisational competenciesHRM competencies, Organisational competencies, and knowledge and innovative competencies. According to them, HRM competency comprises the ability of a company to enlist, develop, retain and utilize future-oriented personnel capacities to Organisational long-term goal achievements. Organisational competency and knowledge and innovative competency relates to the self-renewal HR sub-systems (Pareek and Rao, 1992, 1981). Organisational competency is related to short-term transformations and long-term Organisational change for sustainable Organisational development and knowledge or innovative competency is related to competency and talent management for HRME. Hardrich and Jenner (1996, cited in Zaugg and Thom 2003) point out that in order to develop HRM into a competitive advantage, they must be scarce, valuable, permanent, having limited imitability, marginal transferability and reduced sustainability (Wenger, 1999, cited in Zaugg and Thom 2003). Based on a qualitative study concluded that if a company wished to scale the peak of excellence, appropriate Organisational and knowledge competencies are required. Jha (2008) points out that companies which are applying total quality management strategies in a structural manner, by using an appropriate model for business or performance excellence, will have to achieve high strategic flexibility in human resource systems for moving towards excellence for competitive advantage. According to him, Organisations that are successful in developing flexible resources and processes are able to continuously improve and innovate in a never ending learning cycle. According to Mark L. Pabast,2 excellence in HR has two facets: strategy and tactics. Strategic excellence entails an overall vision of how HR function fits into a business. The last few decades placed a greater emphasis on employees by undertaking many people centred initiatives such as kaizen, lean management, business process reengineering, and

Chairman of the American Bankers Association Human Resource Division Executive Committee and Senior Vice President Human Resource for M. Corp. a Houston based bank holding company

26

total quality management (Zink, 2008). However, the result of these changed concepts have been of limited success (Zink, 2004, cited in Zink, 2008). Pfeffer (1998) reported that success comes from how one organizes and manages people to produce the value that the customers want and from successfully implementing strategy and not just having one. According to him, this implementation strategy derives in large measure from the Organisations people, how they are treated, their skills and competencies, and their efforts on behalf of the Organisation (Pfeffer 1998, p. 17). Based on various studies, related literature and personal experiences, Pfeffer proposed seven HRM practices of successful Organisations (Table 2.1). TABLE 2.1 HRM Practices of Successful Organisations

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7.

Employment security Selective hiring of new personnel Self-managed teams Compensation contingent with performance Extensive training Reduced distinctions Extensive information sharing (financial, and performance)

Source: Adopted from Pfeffer, 1998, cited in Zink, 2008, pp795. Buckingham and Caffman (1999, pp24ff) based on the material gathered from the Gallup Organisation in 24 companies (including 2500 business units) by questioning 1,05,000 employees, report six dimensions that describe workplace and leadership behavior (Table 2.2). The findings are similar to other findings by Herzberg et al. (1967) or Hackman and Oldham (1980). Gallup studies report evidence of underlining the importance of people for Organisational success (cited in Zink 2008).

27

TABLE 2.2 Six Dimensions of Workplace and Leadership Behavior 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Knowing what is expected of me at work Having the materials and equipment needed to do the work Having opportunity to do the best at work Receiving recognition or praise Cared as a person at work Development is encouraged

Source: Zink, 2008, pp. 797. Drawing from the work of OToole and Lawler (2006), Zink (2008) report that if leaders are willing to create a viable business model based on high involvement practices, companies can successfully compete in the global export market. Costea (2005) in a study on the challenges of human resource management towards Organisational effectiveness point out the importance of requisite training and development, flexibility and employee relations practices to achieve excellent Organisational performance. The major finding of the study found out that the practices of training and development challenge, the employee relations challenges and efficiency and flexibility challenge significantly related to Organisational productivity. According to him, government also may create policies to promote above practices, as in the long term, Organisational excellence will reflect positively on national economies. These could be facilitated through proactive Organisational, national and cross-national HRD initiatives. 3. Operational Management Excellence Evans and Dean (2000) stressed for quality work in Organisations as essential to achieve excellence. According to them, excellence and quality are key to business success and that quality is built on teamwork, motivation and leadership at all levels, both within the company and in its external relationships with customers and suppliers. Excellence is growth through greater customer satisfaction and loyalty, expanded repeat businesses, added new clients and having more proactive and happier employees. Bender (2004)

28

related the success strategies of the United States Army, Navy, Air Force, and Marine Corps and applies these strategies to business. According to him, the army works in a life or death environment. Their success and the esteem in which they are held are unparalleled. He has discussed numerous pathways to operational excellence. A military approach to values and several others that can lead to operation excellence and provide insights to business Organisation for achieving excellence. This is an indirect work on excellence and its learnings can surely be applied to business Organisations. Discipline, confidence, sacrifice, values training, ethical decision making, and proactivity are some important dimensions which can probably make most competitive Organisations in todays competitive environment excellent. In a path-breaking six-year study of Toyota, Takeuchi et al. (2008) report that Toyotas success is driven by contradictionsstable and paranoid, systematic and experimental, formal and frank. Toyota Motor Corporation has become one of the worlds greatest companies because of the Toyota Production Systems (TPS). Its unorthodox manufacturing systems are reported to have made it the planets best automobiles at the lowest cost and to develop new products quickly. According to them, not only have Toyotas rivals such as Chrysler, Daimler, Ford, Honda, and General Motors developed TPS-like systems, Organisations such as hospitals and postal services have also adopted its underlying rules, tools, and conventions to become more efficient. In a six-year study, Takeuchi et al. visited facilities in 11 countries, attended many company meetings and events, analyzed internal documents, and interviewed 220 former and existing Toyota employees, ranging from shop-floor workers to Toyotas President. They discovered that while TPS is necessary, it was by no means sufficient to account for Toyotas success. According to the study, Toyota had mastered a soft innovation that relates to corporate culture and the primary reason for success was because of the contradictions and paradoxes created in many aspects of Organisational life. Employees operate in a culture where they constantly grapple with challenges and find solutions by transcending differences rather than resorting to compromises. The culture of tension generates innovative ideas that Toyota implements to pull ahead of competitors, both incrementally and radically. The company unleashes six forces, three of which drive it to experiment and expand, while the remaining three forces help it to preserve its value and identity.
29

Having done the review of literature for the three forms of Organisational excellence, the dependent variable under study, a review of literature of the two independent variables powerful leadership and performance culturefollows. POWERFUL LEADERSHIP Within the literature on leadership, generally, there is a clear recognition of the link between leadership and culture in the process of change (Schein 1992 and Afsanesh 1993, both cited in Parry and Proctor-Thomson 2003, Kotter 1998). Only through leadership can one develop and nurture a culture that is adaptive to change (Kotter 1998:166). According to Schein (1992, cited in Parry and Proctor-Thomson 2003), transformational leadership behavior such as directing attention to critical incidents, reacting to crisis, role modeling, formal statements and telling stories, legends and myths influence culture. Kilmann (1985) believes that leadership is critical because, as Organisational culture develop and change, they also need to be managed and controlled. According to Bass (1998), survival of the Organisation depends upon the shaping of the culture initiated by effective leaders, particularly during change efforts. Kotter and Heskett (1992:84) state that the single most visible factor which distinguishes major cultural changes that succeed from those that fail is competent leadership at the top. They inspire and help create adaptive culture. Leadership influences culture and culture also affects the display of leadership. Pool (2000) suggests that Organisational culture provides the foundation for an Organisations management systems; management behaviour reinforces the principles of culture (Denison, 1990). Parry and Proctor-Thomson (2003) consider culture as a product of industry and environmental demands and leadership as a function of Organisational culture. Public and private sectors are bound by different responsibilities and opportunities and, as such, different types of culture that promote success are developed within each sector (Theobold 1997, Christensen and Gorden 1999). Thus, what works in a private sector may not work in a public sector (Parry and Proctor-Thomson 2003). Differing industry requirements demand different culture types to support Organisational success (Christensen and Gordon 1999). Hampden-Turner (1990) suggests that the

30

interplay exists between leadership and culture such that leaders help to create, shape and develop Organisational culture, and this culture helps to shape all its members. Parry and Proctor-Thomson (2003) in a study on leadership, culture and performance, made propositions that individual leadership and Organisational culture/climate have a reciprocal influence on each other and both affect Organisational outcomes. The study tested a series of models reflecting hypothesized relationships based on the extant literature to identify the models of best fit, and to test proposed explanations. The models relevant for the present research based on the proposed relationships between leadership, culture and Organisational effectiveness (model 1) and based on proposed relationships between team leadership, climate for innovation and leadership outcomes (model 2) are given in Figures 2.2 and 2.3. FIGURE 2.1 Relationship between Leadership, Culture and Organisational Effectiveness
Perceived Effect

TA TF

TF and TA Organisational Culture Organisational Effectiveness Individual Leadership

IA

IB
IM

Ability to Achieve Bottom Line

IS

IC

Notes: TF (Transformational), TA (Transactional), IA (Idealized Attributes), IB (Idealized Behavior), IM (Inspirational Motivation), IS (Intellectual Stimulation), IC (Individualized Consideration). Source: Parry and Proctor-Thomson (2003)

31

FIGURE 2.2 Relationship between Leadership, Culture and Organisational Effectiveness

Support for Innovation Resource Supply Work Unit Effectiveness

Climate for Innovation Work Unit Outcomes Articulate Vision

Work Unit Morale

Team Leadership Foster Acceptance of Goals

Work Unit Productivity

Role Model Source:Parry and Proctor-Thomson (2003)

A PwC Consulting Executive Survey (2002, cited in Winter, 2003) reports that, we need leaders and a culture that understands and can deal with complexity. Strategy, leadership and culture has been identified as major industry drivers in Global Marketing Organisations (GMO) (Hult et al. 2006). According to them, globalization drivers are increasingly more critical in all types of industries, instilling a sense of urgency among senior managers to internationalize Organisations. The senior company leaders are always under pressure to develop globally integrated strategies to achieve efficiency and rationalization across their geographically dispersed subsidiaries. An important conceptualization around which the study was conducted has been that the strategy, leadership and culture shaped the structure and processes which, in turn, affected the performance where positive associations have been found. Darling and Beebe (2007) have described entrepreneurial leadership as one that breaks new grounds, goes beyond the known, and helps to create the future, and helps in achieving excellence based on leadership strategies and values. Entrepreneurial leadership has been found to be the cornerstone of excellence and Organisation development in many research investigative
32

studies (Peters and Austin 1985, Cornesky et al. 1990). Jack Welch, who led General Electric, imbued his Organisation with an energy and culture that recognized him as an entrepreneurial leader through the development of what became the deepest array of executive talent in business and a disparate conglomerate was turned into a global Organisation (Darling and Beebe 2007). Brady (2004) reported that great managerial leadership talent were embedded within effective communication values and networks. Romig (2001) reports that todays Organisational leaders required a new kind of person having great managerial leadership talents and who did not depend on top-down Organisational superiority and subordination. Powerful leadership is about dealing with normal human responses such as fears, insecurity, self-doubt, confusion, etc firmly and sensitively, give support where it is needed and stand firm in the face of strong resistance. They help to create enhanced capacity in their people and who, in turn, become the steward of all the Organisations stakeholders (McLagan and Nel 1996). According to them, the new style of leadership requires changes throughout the Organisation and culture by looking deep within and transforming themselves, creating direct relationships with employees helping managers and front line to change, acting as focused visionary and increasing Organisational strengths. A distinction at this point is needed to be made between an entrepreneurial leader and a powerful leader. Entrepreneurial leaders are those who are creating, managing and expanding the enterprise or the firm. When the enterprise becomes successful and the entrepreneur is known as a successful entrepreneur, these leaders become powerful. We can call those leaders as powerful entrepreneurial leaders. Examples of powerful entrepreneurial leaders are Kumarmangalam Birla, the Ambanis, the Tatas, Jaiprakash Gaur, etc. to name but a few. However, there are also some non-entrepreneur leaders who though have not created enterprises, but are at the helm of managing enterprises and competing with powerful entrepreneurial leaders for survival, growth and excellence. These non-entrepreneurial leaders are in fact intrapreneurial leaders and when their leadership becomes powerful, we can comfortably call them as powerful intrapreneurial leaders. Examples of such leaders are Russi Mody, J.J. Irani, Ratan Tata, chairmen and managing directors of leading PSUs, etc. Powerful intrapreneurial leaders have to be in continuous and constant competition with powerful entrepreneurial leaders for a distinct
33

competitive advantage and, therefore, they must have the competence and qualities of powerful entrepreneurial leaders. Since public enterprises leaders are not entrepreneurs per se, they are intrapreneurial leaders. In achieving Organisational development and excellence, the role of a successful entrepreneurial and/or intrapreneurial leader is important and the leader has to be a powerful leader who can communicate and inspire by appropriate means, the level of competence necessary to influence a group of individuals to become willing participants in the fulfillment of innovational goals (Darling and Beebe 2007). They create new ideas, new products and services, new policies, new procedures and effective communication networks. According to Nurmi and Darling (1997) these leaders believe in attention through vision, meaning through communication, trust through positioning and confidence through respect. Through the vision they take their Organisations beyond the horizon and the established map. In Kanjis Business Excellence Model (Kanji and Moura 2001), leadership plays a prime role for the creation of excellence in Organisations. According to them, leadership is prime and leadership excellence emerges from the core values of the Organisation. Bennis and Nannu (1985, cited in Northhouse 1997) state that management controls, arranges, does things right; leadership unleashes energy, sets the vision, does the right thing. This view is shared by Kotter (1990) when he states that the overriding function of the management is to provide order and consistency in Organisations, whereas the primary function of leadership is to produce change and movement (Kanji and Moura 2001). Georgiades and Macdonells (1998) model also puts leadership at the center of effective functioning of an Organisation with three main leadership tasks: establishment of the vision, the alignment of the culture, and specification of management practices. According to Nadler and Tushman (1990), leaders need to provide a focal point for the energies, hopes and aspirations of people and serve as role models whose behaviors, actions and personal energies demonstrate the desired behavior for concrete outcomes. Researches in leadership has addressed issues of Organisational complexities (Collier and Esteban 2000, Graetz 2000), vision, change and transformations (Burns 1978, cited in

34

Jung and Avolio 1999, Bass 1985, Nadler and Tushman 1990, Northhouse 1997, Cardona 2000, Graetz 2000) within the context of teams (Harmons 1961 cited in Smith and Peterson 1988, Horner 1997) and within the context of learning Organisations (Senge, 1990a, 1990b). Kanjis model of leadership (Figure 2.4) incorporates critical success factors for leadership identified as vision, mission, strategy and key issues which are essential for achieving excellence in leadership. The way these are developed and implemented will determine the quality of leadership in an Organisation. In the scheme of present research, leadership becomes an important and powerful driver of excellence when adequately backed by globalization issues and flexibility in leaders style dynamisms. The model emphasizes the role of leadership in creating (and communicating) a vision backed by the globalization issues, clarifying the mission, defining strategies to achieve them and optimizing strategic outputs by achieving flexibility in leaders style dynamisms. To emerge as a powerful leader, therefore, the major challenge is managing effectively the relationships among the globalization issues, the Organisations vision, mission and strategy, and leaders style dynamisms. The meaning of each of the models constructs and relationships among them is explored in Figure 2.4. FIGURE 2.3 Kanjis Leadership Structural Equation Model of Leadership
Vision

Mission Organisational Values Leadership Excellence Index

Strategy

Key Issues

Source: Adapted from Kanji and Moura (2001:710).

35

The purpose of discussions on leadership in this section is largely to introduce and carry out a specific research that takes into account different and important aspects of leaders and leadership in the context of globalization and competitiveness and move Organisations towards becoming high performing and excellent. The field from which these disciplinespowerful leadership and global leadershiphas evolved is naturally that of leadership. Therefore, before a discussion of the sub-concepts of powerful leadership is initiated, a discussion to relate to the source and needs of leadership is important. They are powerful leadership vis--vis traditional leadership and global leadership. That means leadership and the birth of global and powerful leadership. According to Yukl (2006: 2, cited in Mendenhall 2008), it was not until the beginning of the 20th centurywhen scholars began applying scientific methods to social processes that the study of leadership became widespread both in the academic and business worlds. Prior to this, leadership had been studied mostly via historical analysis, within military studies, and through biographies (Bass 1990; Yukl 2006). By 1990, there were over 7500 extant scholarly studies on leadership (Bass 1990, cited in Mendenhall 2008). The empirical findings within the leadership field are complex, paradoxical, intriguing and at times, problematic. Various scholars have undertaken reviews and categorizations of the plethora of empirical studies that exist in the world (Mendenhall 2008). Yukl (2006), in his review of the literature on leadership has categorized the various studies under five approachestrait, behavioral, power-influence, situational and integrative. Mendenhall (2008) strongly noted that while general findings of the studies on leadership have correlated with leadership behavior, they did not predict leadership behavior strongly enough to make them useful to the real-world Organisations. Scholars have realized that while traits play a role, other variables also are important in making leadership effective (Yukl 2006, cited in Mendenhall 2006). Behavioral approach focused on the initiating structure (task orientation) and consideration (people orientation) and studies carried out at University of Michigan and Ohio State University were not very helpful in providing insights to effective leadership processes (Bass 1990). It could not explain, for example, who could emerge as a leader among peers. The 1960s and the 1970s also saw an increase in studies as to how the situation (context,

36

environment) affected the effectiveness of leadership. Various theories developed from this approach were Least Preferred Coworker (LPC) Model, Path-Goal Theory of Leadership, and Hersey Blanchards Situational Leadership Theoryall focusing on delineating the relationships between the person, situation and leadership outcomes. These theories clearly reveal that situation is an important factor for a leaders effectiveness. However, the search for factors that contribute to high leadership effectiveness continued and leadership was studied using the power-influence approach and also integrative approaches to provide the most appropriate solutions to highly effective leadership. The model given by French and Raven (1959) became the foundation for many leadership studies that focused on power and its relationship to leadership (Bass 1990). The five bases or sources of power were expert, referent, reward, coercive and legitimate. Studies are continuously undertaken and with the emergence of globalization and issues arising from it, and the continuous drive and attempts in defining the effectiveness of leadership, the term global leadership has lately come into prominence. This term, which directly goes with global Organisations, sounds as referring to those leaders who are at the helm of leading and managing global Organisations. The emergence of global leadership is the offshoot of what we call to meet the management challenges of globalization issues, which need to develop executives to manage and lead from a global perspective (Mendenhall et al. 2003). Leadership began to be regarded as more complex and challenging to drive Organisations towards excellence. Scholars came up with identical findings that developing global leadership and business competence in leaders was a high priority (Gregersen et al. 1998, Suutari 2002, Mendenhall et al. 2003). Osland et al. (2006) identified challenges emanating from global contexts such as geographic reach in terms of business operations, cultural reach in terms of people and intellectual reach in terms of development of global mindsets. Lane et al. (2004) argued that, as a term, globalization attempts to describe a complexity of four different kinds multiplicity, interdependence, ambiguity and cross-cultural differences. The field of global leadership development has started developing and scholars are undertaking continuous research and surveys to contribute to this field in the nascent stage of development.
37

Some scholars who have worked in the area of global leadership have conceded that most competencies associated with leadership from the domestic and traditional leadership literature are necessary to lead globally. The global context plays high demands on the deployment of these competencies that for all intents and purposes the skill level and deployment demands render the phenomenon very differently (Mendenhall 2008) and the study of global leadership therefore becomes necessary. Osland and Bird (2006) distinguish between global and domestic leadership in terms of issues related to connectedness, boundary spanning, complexity, ethical challenges, dealing with tensions and paradoxes, pattern recognition, and building learning environments, teams and community, and leading large-scale change efforts across diverse cultures. Living and working constantly in a global context, and experiencing the ongoing intensity of the dimensions of complexity (Lane et al. 2004) can trigger a transformational experience within managers (Osland 1995). These powerful transformational or crucible experiences (Osland 1995, Bennis and Thomas 2002) have been found to produce new mental models in the individualnew worldviews, mindsets, perceptual acumen, and perspectives that simply do not exist within the people who have not gone through such a series of experiences in a global context. In the paucity of a proper definition of global leadership in literature, Mendenhall et al. (2008) define global leaders as individuals who effect significant positive change in Organisations by building communities through the development of trust and the arrangement of Organisational structures and processes in a context involving multiple cross-boundary stakeholders, multiple sources of external cross-boundary, and multiple cultures under conditions of temporal, geographical and cultural complexity. Weeks (1992) described the successful international manager as someone with the knowledge of the business, high degree of tolerance and flexibility, and the ability to work with people. Mintzberg (1973), listed three prime managerial rolesinformational (monitor, spokesperson), interpersonal (leader, liaison), and action (decision maker, innovator, negotiator). According to Osland (2008), emotional stability, decision-maker and negotiator roles, and the ability to learn played a more significant role with global leaders, than it did with domestic leaders. However, in the present context when the entire business environment itself is globalized, even domestic leaders must have these
38

competencies to be successful and meet challenges thrown from global Organisations. McBer (1995) in a research work undertaken for interviewing 55 CEOs from various industries in 15 countries listed the factors that make both global and domestic leaders effective: sharpening the focus, building commitment, and driving for success. Barham (1994, cited in Mendenhall 2008) after interviewing 60 successful senior executives from nine global firms, listed three core competencies: cognitive complexity, emotional energy and psychological maturity. Wills and Barham (1994) identified three values as central features of the psychological maturitythe curiosity to learn, living in the here and now, and personal morality. In one of the most exciting contributions from the largest comparative leadership study, the Project GLOBE by House et al. (2004, cited by Osland, 2008a), a 170-member multinational research team obtained data on indigenous leadership from 17,000 managers in 62 countries belonging to telecommunications, food and banking industries in their own countries. The cultural framework was developed comprising nine dimensions: performance orientation, assertiveness, future orientation, human orientation, institutional collectivism, in-group collectivism, gender egalitarianism, power distance, and uncertainty avoidance (Javidan and House 2001). It identified a list of leader attributes that are universally acceptable, universally unacceptable and culturally contingent i.e., they work in some cultures, but not in others (Den Hartog et al. 1999), shown in Table 2.2. The kind of leadership required to make domestic Organisations as high performing and also become global is also an important area for study of leadership. TABLE 2.3 Project GLOBE Leadership Traits
Universally Acceptable Traits Decisive Informed Honest Dynamic Administratively skilled Coordinator Just Team builder Effective bargainer Universally Unacceptable Culturally Contingent Traits Traits Ruthless Enthusiastic Egocentric Self-sacrificial Asocial Risk-taking Non-explicit Sincere Irritable Ambitious Non-cooperative Self-effacing Loner Compassionate Dictatorial Unique

39

Dependable Win-win problem solver Plans ahead Intelligent Excellence oriented

Willful

Source: Osland, 2008a, pp.33. An important thought that comes to the mind, therefore, is what to call this kind of leadership that is required to lead and mange domestic Organisations with a drive to move towards excellence and the domestic boundaries for which there are no longer any limitations today. However, these enterprises also have to work under other domestic constraints and the competition posed by MNCs to what we call global Organisations. The threat and challenges posed by these top domestic Organisations poses a much larger challenge to manage and lead amidst the unanticipated strategies of the global Organisations to remain global and maintain their minimum level of operations that they have attained. Domestic Organisations have, therefore, to not only counter and meet the challenges thrown by global Organisations, but also emerge as successful, become high performing, and eventually move towards becoming global as becoming global is no longer today a constraint for domestic Organisations. It is in this context that the concept of powerful leadership has been thought to be an appropriate one. It is not necessary that the traits and leadership competencies for powerful leadership should have its origin only in the power-influence approach based on the French and Ravens (1959) model cited earlier, which did not explain leadership effectiveness satisfactorily. Combining the strong aspects of what can be had from the traditional leadership literature and those that are essential form the global leadership literature. The intent is to produce something that can be called as powerful leadership to make domestic Organisations not only successful, but also achieve high organic growth amidst the severe challenges thrown or likely to be thrown by global Organisations in the domestic place as certainly, it can not be managed and led in isolation of the global Organisations. It is in this context that a review of global leadership literature is done as drawing upon that is likely to produce insights about powerful leadership. Such a review, in addition to the review of powerful leadership literature available, will help develop an appropriate framework of

40

powerful leadership to have a distinct competitive advantage over global Organisations. Domestic Organisations, too, have to function together with global corporations as operating in isolation in the context of massive globalization phenomenon today is impossible. Relevant review of the global leadership literature therefore is done. Tichy et al. (1992, cited in Mendenhall 2008) wrote about true globalists, as they called them, who have (i) a global mindset; (ii) a set of global leadership skills and behaviors; (iii) energy, skills, and talent for global networking; (iv) the ability to build effective teams; and (v) global change agents skills. These leaders develop people and Organisations simultaneously. Kets de Vries and Mead (1992) developed a list of leadership qualities that included envisioning, strong operational codes, environmental sense making, ability to instill values, inspiring, empowering, building and maintaining Organisational networks, interpersonal skills, pattern recognition and cognitive complexity, and hardness. Rhinesmiths articulation of global mindset has two components intellectual intelligence and emotional intelligence. Both lead to business acumen and personal management (Rhinesmith 2003). Brakes (1997) global leadership triad is constructed using 2.5). Articulating the vision, mission and strategy of an Organisation is an important attribute of a leader (Kets de vries et al. 2004). Goldsmith et al. (2003) identified 15 dimensions of global leadership and noted that 10 of their dimensions are also found in domestic leadership and continue to be important. They are demonstration of integrity, encouraging constructive dialogues, creating shared vision, developing people, empowering people, customer satisfaction, maintaining competitive advantage, leading change, achieving personal mastery and anticipating opportunities. Powerful leadership will also require possession of shared leadership, building partnerships and traits of thinking globally. thee componentsbusiness acumen (intellectual intelligence), personal effectiveness, and relationship management (function of emotional intelligence) (Figure

41

FIGURE 2.4 Brakes Global Leadership Triad

Relationship Management Change agentry Community building Conflict management and negotiation Cross-cultural communication Influencing

Transformational Self

Business Acumen Depth of field Entrepreneurial spirit Professional expertise Stakeholder orientation Total Organisational astuteness

Personal Effectiveness Accountability Curiosity and learning Improvisation Maturity Thinking agility

Source: Brake (1997:44).

Goldsmith et al. (2003) list the following important leadership competencies to drive future Organisations towards excellence: genuinely listening to others, creating and communicating a clear Organisational vision, becoming a role model for living the very same Organisational values, uniting an Organisation into an effective team, clearly identifying priorities and focusing on vital few, building partnerships across the company, and constantly treating people with respect and dignity. Leadership competencies to lead Organisation in the 21st century in domestic Organisations can be drawn from McCall and Hollenbecks (2002) model of global executives. The model is

42

developed based on interviews with global executives (who are also global leaders) and focuses on the interaction and partnership between the individual and the Organisation. Most of the competencies are appropriate for leading public and private sector enterprises and a great deal of attention is paid to this model as these can be powerful drivers of Organisations towards excellence. The important competencies required to make a powerful leader, among others, can be: leading and managing othersselection; development, motivation and team building; dealing with problematic relationships headquarters, bosses, unions, government, media, politics; and developing good leadership qualities within self and others. According to Chopard (2002, cited in Winter 2003), to successfully manage high performing Organisations who, worldwide, are operating in an environment of increasing volatility, high performance leadership is the only way. Leadership will be required to be nurtured at all levels across the Organisation. Between 1984 and the present day, three things have changed: scale from national to global, speed from steady to fast, and standards from local to world class. Nelson Mandela influenced the world from his prison cell, and we are talking of a leadership which is powerful and can influence an Organisation in the most turbulent state (Winter 2003). Powerful leadership is bound to make a difference as they inspire creativity in the groups they lead. Efforts such as creative problem solving and strategy are essential to the work of leaders in the knowledge economy (Leonard and Swap, 1999). Organisational leaders are continuously resorting to one or the other transformation efforts with a strong determination to transform and turnaround towards making it a great Organisation. However, as Kotter (1995) reports, most transformation efforts fail, particularly because a critical mistake according to him in any of the phases have a devastating impact, slowing momentum of pace of change and sometimes negative hardwon gains. Also, many change leadersinternal or externalmay have relatively lesser experience in renewing Organisations and even very capable people often make at least one big error (Kotter 1995). Eight steps listed by Kotter (1995) relate to establishing a sense of urgency, forming a powerful guiding coalition, creating a vision, communicating the vision, empowering others to act on the vision, planning for and creating short-term

43

wins, consolidating improvements and producing still more changes and institutionalizing new approaches. Starting a transformation program, cascading it down below, and seeing it achieving transformational goals through the aggressive cooperation of many individuals are important. A paralyzed senior management has too many managers and not enough leaders. Enough real leaders are required in an Organisation (Kotter 1995), particularly powerful leaders for driving and leading change towards its transformation and excellence. If a change target is the entire company, the CEO is the key; if it is needed in a division, the division general manager is the key. At all these key positions, great leaders, powerful leaders or change champions are needed. Kotters analysis towards creating a powerful guiding leadership coalition to have a minimum mass for something worthwhile to be happening is helpful in understanding the successful transformation efforts. Kotter (1995) firmly believes that in successful transformations, the chairman or president or division general manager, plus another five or 15 or 50 people come together and develop a shared commitment to excellence performance through renewal. According to him, this group never includes all of the companys most senior executives because some people wont just buy in. In most successful cases, the coalition is pretty powerful in terms of titles, information and expertise, reputations and relationships. In both small and large Organisations, a successful guiding team may consist of only three to five people during the first year of a renewal effort, but in big companies, the coalition needs to grow to the 20-50 range. Besides senior members or coalition of board members, a powerful union leader also helps in achieving transformation. Groups require to be headed by strong line leadership for the needed power. In failed transformations, there is plenty of plans and programs but no vision. The sustainability of powerful leaders are also important as Kotter puts that one bad succession decision at the top of an Organisation can undermine a decade of hard work. Poor succession decisions are possible when boards of directors are not an integral part of the renewal effort. According to Locander and Leuchauer (2006), the phrase, simultaneous loose-tight properties used by Peters and Waterman (1982) captures the essence of the leadership paradox of structure. Organisational units require to be so structured that work can be

44

effectively coordinated, performed and assessed without robbing employees of their dignity, stifling their creativity, and inhibiting their ability (Locander and Leuchauer 2006). Kotter and Heskett (1992: 146) identify successful leaders as those who repeatedly communicate their vision, allow people to challenge these messages and stimulate middle managers to take up the cause and provide leadership themselves. These are characteristics of transformational leadership and are described by Bass and Avolio (1993) to be made of five key compositions: idealized attributes, idealized influence behavior, inspirational motivation, intellectual stimulation, and individual consideration. Idealized influence and idealized attributes describe leaders who act as role models, can be trusted, are respected and demonstrate high ethical standards. Inspirational motivation involves arousing team spirit, motivation and enthusiasm. It also describes the process of creating vision for the future. Intellectual stimulation describes leadership that supports and encourages innovation and creativity. In addition, intellectual stimulation encourages the followers to question old assumptions. As the fourth transformational leadership style, individualized consideration occurs when leaders pay attention to the developmental needs of the followers, and develop personalized interactions and relationships (Bass and Avolio 1997). Osterman (1994) found that such concern for employees well being was a primary factor contributing to innovation within an Organisation. Podsakoff et al. (1990) defined similar constructs of transformational leadership, including identifying and articulating a vision, providing an appropriate model, and fostering acceptance of goals. Bass (1998) and Podsakoff et al. (1990) conceptualized transformational leadership as promoting flexibility, adaptability and innovation in their followers and their Organisations. Gill et al. (1998) believe that the new post-bureaucratic Organisation will require transformational leadership for enhancing flexibility, horizontal networks, high-trust relationships, adaptability to change and uncertainty, innovation and empowerment of employees. Such a phenomenon will lead to the necessary re-invention of Organisational cultures which, in turn, will lead to Organisational success (Gill et al. 1998). According to Valle (1999), because of the changing nature of public service, the public sector requires new leadership that will promote flexibility and adaptability in Organisations and in individuals. Public sector leadership must provide clear and pronounced vision, effective communication, and

45

inspired motivation towards Organisational goals. Leaders who inspire and help create adaptive Organisational cultures possess the qualities of transformational leadership as described by Bass (1998). This may more appropriately be referred to as performance culture. Nutt and Backoff (1993) highlight factors such as using ideals (visions) that are co-created in the place of objectives or goals, moving to be proactive rather than threat driven, adopting innovative ideas, emphasizing participation of key stakeholders, reducing hierarchical distinctions, and empowering followers. A powerful leadership must, however, use power and trust dimensions judiciously while leading. Kotter and Schlesinger (1979) defines power as a measure of a persons potential to get others to do what he or she wants them to do, as well as to avoid being forced to do what he or she does not want to do. Machiavelli (1950) suggested fear and love as the main base of power. Hersey and Blanchard (1982) proposed seven bases of powercoercive, legitimate, expert, reward, referent, information, and connection. Pareek (1997, 2003) have given six bases of power have been included in the coercive power groupOrganisational position (legitimate power), punishment (coercive power), charisma (charismatic power), personal relationship (emotional power), closeness to the source of power (reflected power), and withholding information or resources (manipulative power). He has also proposed six persuasive power basesreward (reinforcing power), expert power, competence power, referrent power (being a role model), extension power (empathy, caring and helping others), and logical power (based on information and the rationale of the information). According to Kellerman (2007), in an era of flatter, networked Organisations and crosscutting teams of knowledge workers, it is not always obvious who exactly is following (or, for that matter, who exactly is leading) and how they are going about it. Reporting relationships are shifting and new talent-management tools are constantly emerging. A confluence of changescultural and technologicalhas influenced what subordinates want and how they behave. Leaders need to understand bosses better and to understand the dynamics between them and their followers.

46

Followers are low in the hierarchy, have less power, authority and influence than their superiors. However, subordinates do not follow all the time. Followers now think of themselves as free agents, not as dependent underlings. At times they also act by withholding support from bad leaders, throwing their weight behind good ones, and sometimes claiming commanding voices for those lower down in the social or Organisational hierarchy (Kellerman 2007). CEOs share power and influence with a range of players, including boards, regulators, and shareholder activists. Expertise can and often doestrump position as an indicator of who really is leading and who is really following (Drucker 1967, cited in Kellerman 2007). Kellerman also points out that relationship between superiors and their subordinates is not one-sided and nor are all followers one and the same. Followers too act in their own self-interests as leaders do. While followers may lack authority, at least in comparison with their superiors, they do not lack power and influence. According to Waterman (1994), to be a true leader, one needs to give up control in a narrow sense to have control in a much broader sense. According to T.K.A. Nair (cited in Spencer et al. 2007), a public sector enterprise (PSE) needed a CEO with skill-sets depending on the organisations level of performance. A person who could lead a Navaratnaa status accorded by GoI to nine leading PSEs in Indiawould be very different from the kind of person who could turn around an ailing company. Spencer et al. (2007) point out that the first factor is grounded in two outstanding strengths of Indian leaders: their well-developed intellect and their competitive focus on achievement. Outstanding Indian CEOs stand head and shoulders above their peers in other countries, when it comes to their ability to think both analytically and strategically. Also, in case of Indian business leaders, there is a dark side to their strongly developed intellects and achievement drivesa relative absence of tuning into other people. At times they are so focused on entrepreneurship and strategy, that they neglect the task of energizing their teams. When they energize their teams they get much better results. There is also a lack of attention to others, especially as individuals. Indian CEOs need to shift from strongly entrepreneurial energy to a more balanced style of leadership.

47

According to Spencer et al. (2007), inner strength is an important leadership quality to guide, lead and drive Organisations during turbulent times. P.M. Sinha (ex-CEO of Pepsico India) points out, Value-based leadership and a culture that promotes integrity are the most important elements which the CEO should build around the goals of the Organisation and bond the team through sustaining values. According to V.N. Kaul (CAG of India), It is the personal courage and conviction on the part of the CEO which leads him to success. D.S. Brar (former CEO/MD of Ranbaxy) says, In all the major decisions that I have taken, I have been guided by an inner voice. Collins (2001) in his concept of Level 5 leadership, points out that it is not just about humility and modesty, but more about a ferocious resolve, an almost stoic determination to do whatever needs to be done to make the company great. According to him, professional will and personal humility are both important sides of Level 5 leadership. The three sub-concepts associated with powerful leadershipglobalization issues; vision, mission and strategy; and leadership dynamismare discussed below: 1. Globalization Issues Globalization has been variously described as a hollow word with no generally accepted definition (Stewart 1999); a contentious complicated subject whose central elements inspire major debate among economists, environmentalists, left-wing radicals, political conservatives, religious leaders, cyberprophets, and just common business people (Micklethwait and Woolridge 2000); and as an emerging discipline (Boyett and Boyett, 2001). According to French (2000) also, globalization means vastly different things to different people. To some, globalization means the growth of global corporations whose far-flung operations transcend national borders and allegiances. To others it signals a broader cultural and social integration, spurred by mass communication and internet. Frenchs definition of globalization is: Globalisation is a broad process of societal transformation that includes growth in trade, investment, travel, computer networking, and transboundary pollution (cited in Boyett and Boyett, 2001). Gupta and Govindrajan (1999) point out that globalization can be defined in different ways, depending on the level for which it is being talked. At the worldwide level,

48

globalization refers to the growing economic interdependence among countries as reflected in increasing cross-border flow of goods, services, capital and know-how. At the level of a specific country, globalization refers to the extent of inter-linkages between a countrys economy and the rest of the world, as measured by things such as exports as a ratio of the Gross Domestic Product (GDP), inward and outward flows of foreign direct investment and portfolio investment, and inward and outward flows of royalty payments associated with technology transfer. At the level of a specific industry, globalization refers to the degree to which a companys competitive position within that industry in one country is independent with that in another country. The key indicators are the extent of cross-border trade within the industry as a ratio of total worldwide production, the extent of cross-border investment as a ratio of total capital invested in the industry, and the proportion of industry revenue accounted for by companies that compete in major regions. At the level of the specific company, globalization refers to the extent to which a company has expanded its revenue and asset base across countries and engages in crossborder flows of capital, goods, and know-how across subsidiaries. Key indicators are international dispersion of sales, revenues and asset base, intra-firm trade in intermediate and finished goods, and intra-firm flows of technology. Globalization, according to Gupta and Govindarajan (2000), is no longer discretionary. It has become imperative because of the expanded need for growth (market rewards growth), need for efficiency (to create a cost advantage relative to another player in the same industry), the need for greater knowledge (to be able to operate successfully in any environment), and to be ahead of competitors by achieving global presence. Globalization issues are pronounced by the presence of a variety of complex interaction patterns among various sub-units, host governments, customers, pressures for change and stability, and the need to re-start individual identity in a complex web of Organisational relationships (Prahalad 1990). According to him, it is one beset with ambiguity and stress, facts, emotions, anxieties, power, dependence, competition, collaboration, team efforts everything. Companies have been and are grappling with these issues and social scientists are hurriedly working to produce empirically sound insights to guide the selection, training, and ongoing development of global leaders (Mendenhall et al. 2003). Globalization issues have put heavy pressure on domestic Organisations also to become
49

high performing, competitive and be among the leading Organisations in the industry. Technology has been advancing at an exponential rate, enabling increasing globalization (Kotter, 1998), and the previous Organisation boundaries has been dissolving (Arthur and Rousseau, 1996). Extensive globalization and competition has produced economic environments that are more turbulent and volatile than ever before (Parry and ProctorThomson, 2003). Yeung and Reddy (1995), in a survey of 1200 managers from 10 major global corporations in eight countries, identified articulating vision, values and strategy; acting as a catalyst for strategic and cultural change; empowering others; and having result and customer orientation as major leadership competencies. These competencies among leaders will make them more powerful and therefore, domestic leaders having these competencies will be powerful leaders and will make contributions towards the achievement of excellence. Bikson et al. (2003) in structured interviews with 135 US HR and senior managers in public, for-profit and non-profit sectors and unstructured interviews with 24 expertsexamined the impact of globalization on HR needs, global leadership competencies, and policies and practices needed to produce sufficient global leaders. They found that integrated skill requirements, substantive depth in an Organisations primary business, managerial ability (especially, teamwork and interpersonal skills) as important leadership traits and competencies to drive Organisations towards excellence. Responding to globalization issues towards the close of the 20th century, Kumarmangalam Birla pointed out that Organisations have to seamlessly relate to the international context for survival or be prepared to perish (Birla, 1999). Globalization issues have to be seen in much wider perspective. Farrel (2006) points out that the key to success in todays economy is to foster competition to spur innovations. This may require looking beyond merely targeted investments in information technology to other factors leading to higher productivity and growth. According to Boyett and Boyett (2001), there is plenty of evidence about globalization and provide interesting and insightful statistics. In 1999, the worlds largest companies spent US$440 billion to expand their overseas operations. In the same year, US$1.5 trillion in capital was being moved around the world everyday (Rosen et al. 2000). It is

50

estimated that by 2030, 80 percent of the worlds GDP will be produced and consumed in global markets. Worldwide, globally addressable GDP is expected to reach as much as US$73 trillion, which is roughly 10-12 times of what it is today (Bryan et al. 1999). Between 1970 and 1998, foreign direct investments grew twice as fast as trade, and the number of transnational corporations grew from 7000 to over 50000 (French 2000). The investments of United States abroad tripled between 1982 and 1996 (Rosenweig 1998). Micklethwait and Woolridge (2000) argue that the overwhelming proof of globalization has to be retained with a degree of skepticism, as the fact of globalization so far has been an exaggeration. Krugman (1997) also had envisaged various problems. Boyett and Boyett (2001) also argue that they are very much real and regarding them as exaggeration might be problematic as mentioned by Krugman (1997). Friedman (2000) offers one of the best explanations for why globalization has emerged. According to him, the demise of the cold war and the rise of globalization as the new, defining international system is driven by three fundamental changes: democratization of technology (by way of connections in real time, globalization of production and geographic dispersion of wealth creation); democratization of finance (making the capital available to start-ups and new players, such as the high-tech ventures that democratized the technology); and democratization of information (meaning, wherever we are, we can all shop for ideas, political solutions, products, or whatever else we desire, making this as the ultimate driver of globalization). Spencer et al. (2007), reflecting on the boundary management and environmental constraints of PSEs point out that they spend much more time dealing with various ministries, regulators, and other government authoritiesincluding answering Parliamentary media questions (i.e. boundary management)as compared to the heads of private enterprises. They also report that the present environment is better than what it was before. These problems are not destiny: emotional intelligence can be learned, and already great progress has been made in improving the business environment and infrastructure in India (Spencer et al. 2007:38-39). Spencer et al. (2008) report that the aspirations of the business community in India has been scaling new heights. The CII adopted the theme Competitiveness of India Inc for the year 2002-03, setting a target

51

for India to ensure that it tops the World Economic Forums Growth Competitiveness Index by 2010. The CII believes that global competition will be the name of the game and competitiveness will be the key, not only for growth, but also for survival. A level playing field is regarded an essential prerequisite. The Indian CEO competency study by Spencer et al. (2008) also point out that business leaders of India are as competent as their Western counterparts and can make their enterprises on global stage if a level playing field is required. While this will certainly help, powerful leadership competencies are something that must manage the prevailing business environment created by politicians/government without waiting for a level playing field (contrary to the suggestions made by Spencer et al. 2008 in their empirical study) to excel in the new globalized environment. Regulatory constraints have been there, it is still there and will be there, though the nature of constraints may be different. There have been business leaders in India who have operated in the same business constraints and have still moved to the global stage, even among the public enterprises (for eg., MMTC in the public sector and Ranbaxy in the private sector). The greatest indicator of powerful leaders will be the creation of world-class internal environment to harness the power of Indian talent, such that fewer and fewer Indians are motivated to leave their homeland in search of appropriate challenging opportunities (Spencer et al. 2008), somewhat closer/similar to global leadership. According to Subodh Bhargava (Advisor, Eicher Goodearth), Public sector CEOs have a very difficult task indeed. They are answerable to various Committees of the Parliament which in fact, leads to no accountability at all. Managing the Government and Ministers becomes a preoccupation. According to Rajendra Singh (ex-CMD, DEFL), Communication with all the stakeholders is an important element of the CEOs task (both cited in Spencer et al. 2007). An integrated perspective and approach is needed for meeting the challenges of globalization. The vision, mission and strategies must be evolved taking into account the globalization concerns. The review of literature related to vision, mission and strategies is given in the section that follows.

52

2. Vision, Mission and Strategies Khandwalla (1992) gives a new and wider perspective to Organisational mission as one which looks beyond itself (society, sector, field, humanity, ideal, etc.). An Organisational vision of excellence must, thus, incorporate the traits the Organisation would like to display or be known for. For instance, one Organisation may like to be known for innovativeness; another for efficiency or growth rate; a third for customer orientation; a fourth for care and development of its staff; and a fifth for the enterprise it has shown in opening up new markets. Visions and missions can be powerhouses for exciting the imagination of stakeholders and for getting their loyalty and commitment. When properly harnessed, the vision and mission of an Organisation may lead to excellence. A case study by Singh and Bhandarkar (1990, cited in Khandwalla 1992) provides insights as to how a vision can result in actual excellence of a public sector Organisation, crossing a turnover of from Rs. 1200 million in 1982-83 to Rs. 24000 million in 1985-86 and is now a company with turnover of over US$ 3 billion, has a wholly owned subsidiary in Singapore with a turnover of US$ 1 billion and also a ispat mill at Orissa. The Organisation has excelled and is continuing to be excellent and dominating the stock prices. Khandwala (1992) has also talked of different types of vision: vision of performance excellence (excellence vis--vis profitability, growth rate, productivity, efficiency, record of commissioning of projects on time, etc.); entrepreneurial vision, vision of quality; institutionalization of mission/vision; and also Organisational passion for excellence. Khandwalla (1992) gives several examples of visions of Organisational excellence in the public sector (Exhibit 2.1). Vision, mission and strategies are closely knit and strongly-linked drivers of achieving excellence in leadership. The inter-woven natures of these three are important for Organisational excellence. A vision, according to Kotter (1995), is something that clarifies the direction in which an Organisation needs to move. According to him, without a sensible vision, a transformation effort can easily dissolve into a list of confusing and incompatible projects that can take the Organisation in the wrong direction or nowhere at all. A sound vision is needed and also well communicated using all communication

53

channels of the Organisation. Too often, employees understand the new vision and want to help make it happen, but something appears to be blocking its path (Kotter 1995) which needs to be managed. EXHIBIT 2.1 Visions of Corporate Excellence in the Indian Public Sector
We want to achieve excellent performance in terms of quantity, quality and productivity. We want to take company to the international map of the chemical industry. (Chemical manufacturer) Excellence in electronics through quality and service. (Electronics company) Leadership in technology related to the oil sector and in new areas such as off-shore oil and gas production, deep ocean mining and new areas in non-ferrous metallurgy. (Project engineering enterprise) We want to excel in productivity, quality and vendor upgradation. (Car producer) To perform well on international standards of performance and quality. (Oil producer). Very high stress on excellence in performance, high quality of life after work hours, preservation of the environment. (Aluminum producer) We want to be recognized as one of the worlds best transportation consultants based on a high degree of professionalism, flexibility and quick responses, and competitive pricing. (Railways consultancy company) To modernize our plants with resources generated by the company without budgetary support from the government. (Steel maker).
Source: Visions of excellence reported by the top and senior executives of Indian PSEs during a training workshop at the Indian Institute of Management, Ahmedabad, in 1988.

Vision, according to Bennis and Nannus (1997, cited in Lynch 2000), have been defined as a mental image of a possible and desirable future state of the Organisation. This painting must be understood and communicated throughout the Organisation and therefore should be so designed that it is vivid, memorable, inspiring, meaningful and brief (Thornberry 1997). According to Kenney (1994), vision relates to some futuristic ideal, to some notion of how things could /should be, and can reflect an inspired state of being for an individual, an Organisation, or society at large. Thompson (1997) describes a vision statement as one which the Organisation has to become in future, and provides individual Organisations and societies with a sense of direction and purpose. Hamel and Prahalad (1984, cited in Lynch 2000) have suggested five criteria for judging the appropriateness of a vision statement: foresight, breadth, uniqueness, consensus and

54

actionability. The leadership role in creating a compelling vision, translating it into action and sustaining it has been highlighted by many researchers (Bass, cited in Northhouse 1997; Bennis and Nannus, 1985; Cardona 2000). It is not enough for leaders to be able to develop a simultaneously inspiring and realistic vision, but must be able to ably communicate and implement. Leaders must be effective, be credible and above all powerful. A large part of their power will come by their sharing the vision with their employees, involving them in implementing those actions desired for the fulfillment of the vision, whereby they are seen by their followers as people who can be followed and trusted. Kenney (1994) points out that vision needs values and principles to be implemented and actively pursued. Therefore, the vision reflects the Organisational values upon which it is based. According to Winter (2003), a sense of direction has been fundamental to creating and sustaining high performance in a global game of mergers, acquisitions, downsizing, technology change, and the like. According to him, a sense of direction comes from three core elements: passion for what one does, values that guide decisions and actions, and goals and strategies to focus efforts. These three factors blend together to provide the direction that shapes performance and quality. One of Australias greatest Olympians, rower Nick Green won two Olympic gold medals and four world championship because of passion for finding how good he could be. Passion oozes from high-performing people and teams. It leads them back, time and again, to find or reaffirm a vision. Vision consolidates, passion initiates. Passion creates the power that then finds expression in the vision (Green 2000, cited in Winter 2003). Pointing the power of vision Winter (2003:61) cites the example of the revival of Olympics, which was recreated after 2000 years by the then vision held by Baron Pierre De Coubertin, who saw it as a tradition of the ancient Greek Games. Coubertin saw the Games as a vehicle for, and a symbol of, the educational and personal development that can result from participating in sports. Since then the Olympics has become the worlds largest peacetime event and the only place that the nations of the world truly come together. The power in the vision, stated in a few words or rather minimum words, comes

55

from the passion. Passion gives a sense of direction by creating values that guides decisions, actions, goals and strategies to focus on the efforts. Mission, according to Thompson (1997), reflects the essential purpose of the Organisation, concerning particularly why it is in existence, the nature of the business it is in and the customers it seeks to serve and satisfy. The purpose of mission is to explicitly communicate to all the stakeholders inside and outside the Organisation what the company needs (Lynch 2000). Mission and vision are sometimes presented as very similar terms, although, as Georgiades and Macdonell (1998, cited in Kanji and Moura 2001) state, the organisations mission is a statement of purpose not its direction or sense of destiny. The mission summarizes the reasoning and values that lie behind it (Lynch 2000) and the leader needs to generate trust, enthusiasm and commitment among Organisational members for the chosen purpose (Kanji and Moura 2001). A clear Organisational mission makes goals clear. The clearer the goal, better the performance over time (Winter 2003) who state that for speed, agility and high performance, develop a clear statement or symbol of the mission of the Organisation and various teams in it. According to him, powerful missions generally contain three inter-linked criteria: unique function or cause (invent new technologies to deliver competitive edge), standard of the challenge (global challenge), and fundamental relationship (unique to the particular company). Khandwalla (1992) calls an Organisational mission as a contribution the Organisation wants to make to an entity beyond itself, such as a sector, society as a whole, or a field. According to him, Organisational missions, when effectively articulated and internalized by the leadership and staff of an Organisation, can have enormous impact on the performance of the Organisation. Some few missions of public enterprises cited by Khandwalla (1992), is given in Exhibit 2.2. EXHIBIT 2.2 Missions of a few Indian Public Enterprises
To be the leader in the steel industry and be internationally competitive (Steel maker) To make the country self-sufficient in the field of refining and marketing petroleum products (Petroleum refiner) To produce quality products, at reasonable cost, and in time, to facilitate the generation of electrical power, its transmission and utilization in the country (Producer of heavy electrical

56

equipment)
Source: Listed by Khandwalla (1992) based on responses of senior and top level managers in a training program of PSEs at the Indian Institute of Management, Ahmedabad, in 1988.

Khandwalla also discriminates between abstract (seeking peace and human happiness) and concrete missions (bringing about cessation of hostilities between two specific warring states); global (United Nations pursuit of global mission of peace and well being) and local (parliament of a nation pursuing local mission of peace and well-being of people living in the country). According to (Lynch 2000, cited in Kanji and Moura 2001), strategy is a means to pursue the purpose and overall objectives of the Organisation. It has to have its source from an environmental analysis of the business the Organisation is in and its own resources and potentialities. A winning strategy is expected to anticipate, guide, change and create commitment in the Organisations members. Burkholder (2005) cites a shared and well developed understanding of an Organisations strategy among business and HR managers. According to him, there are still Organisations that have not yet articulated and/or shared a clear mission and objectives with their workforce. A study by Mankins and Steele (2005), which surveyed senior executives in more than 197 companies worldwide, found a poorly communicated strategy as the second highest reason cited by executives as the reason for why their companies underperform. According to them, part of the reason for poor communication is because in many Organisations the discussion still focuses on what the strategy and objectives consist of rather than how to implement them, ending up with vague and generic business objectives. Human resource leaders can play an important role by facilitating how the business strategy and subsequent objectives will be implemented in their Organisations. Porter (1996) argues that competitive advantage arises from an Organisations choice of unique activities and/or by performing activities more efficient than competitors. Porter also argues that increased diffusion of best practices in todays environment results in only temporary competitive advantage. According to him, activitiestheir choice and/or their performance (i.e., how well they are implemented) form the bases of competitive advantage. The competitive advantage of South West Airlines and Ikea are based on unique, tailored sets of interlocked activities, with entire business systems of activities

57

fitting and reinforcing one another, thereby reducing costs and increasing differentiation, fundamental to sustainability of competitive advantage. Fairbanks and Lindsay (1997) point out that a paradigm shift is required for doing business overly conditioned by strategies that were successful in the past to a fundamentally new approach involving assessment of the strategic positioning of the firm along three broad dimensions: choice of advantage, scope and technology in addition to laying emphasis on management of HR, operations, finances, sourcing which also are critical to improving operational productivity. These factors need to be aligned to the choice of advantage, scope and technology. According to them, competitiveness (winning or losing in competition) results where good quality strategy (turning informed choices into timely action, that is sustainable, beyond merely exploiting of labor and environment) and high operational productivity (utilizing all inputs of an operation labor, capital, raw materials, energy and knowledge to generate outputs more efficiently) intersect. According to Lee and Miller (1996), three strategic dimensions are crucial: cost leadership, differentiation on marketing, and differentiation on innovation. Cost leadership is directed at gaining market superiority over competitors by means of a lowcost position by reducing production costs, increasing capacity utilization, controlling material supply or product distribution, among other things (similar to that proposed by Miles and Snow, 1978). Neilson, et. al. (2008) based on research on the secrets to successful strategy execution report that enterprises fail at execution because they go straight to structural reOrganisation and neglect the most powerful drivers of effectiveness and their relative strengths (given in brackets are: information flow [54%], decision rights [50%], motivators [26%] and structure [25%]). According to them, a brilliant strategy, a blockbuster product, or a breakthrough technology can put an Organisation on the competitive map if solid execution strategies are there. Proper implementation of these leads to proper structure and motivators. According to Montgomery (2008), strategy should be able to guide the development of the companyits identity and purpose

58

over time. A framework provided by him for making such a shift in respect of goal, leadership, form, time frame, and ongoing activity from the approach prevailing to that desired, is given in Figure 2.6. FIGURE 2.5 Shifts Required in Strategy
The Prevailing Approach: Strategy as a Set Solution A long-term sustainable competitive advantage The CEO and strategy consultants Unchanging plan that derives from an analytical, left-brain exercises Intense period of formulation followed by prolonged period of implementation Defending an established strategy through time
Source: Adapted from Montgomery (2008:44).

Shift Required in Respect of Goal Leadership Form Time Frame Ongoing Activity

Approach Desired: Strategy as a Dynamic Process Creation of value CEO as chief strategist; the job cannot be outsourced Organic process that is adaptive, holistic, and open-ended Everyday, continuous, unending Fostering competitive advantage and developing the company through time

Kaplan and Norton (2008) point out that successful strategy execution has two basic rules: understand the management cycle that links strategy and operations, and know what tools to apply at each stage of the life cycle. According to them, a companys underperformance is caused by breakdown in the companys management systems for strategy execution (integrated set of processes and tools that a company uses to develop its strategy, translate it into operational actions, and monitor and improve the effectiveness of both) and not the managers lack of ability or effort, where defining the mission, vision and values are key to developing an effective strategy. According to Porter (2008), there are five competitive forces that can shape a companys strategy (the configuration of the five forces will differ by industry): threat of new entrants; bargaining power of suppliers; bargaining power of buyers; threat of substitute products; and services and rivalry among existing competitors. All threevision, mission and strategyneeds a strong focus for sustained Organisational excellence of an enterprise. The focus in leadership may require flexibility and thus may call for

59

situational/contextual dynamism in leadership and the review of literature in the section that follows specifically discusses leadership dynamism. 3. Leadership Dynamism Leaders, according to Goldsmith et al. (2003), can not embody all of the needed critical capabilities. However, in the present times of globalization issues, where the very changed nature of business Organisation (merged, allianced, outsourced and virtual) is beginning to dictate Organisations, shared leadership is expected to gain prominence as the operating model of the future. In future, there will be fewer all knowing CEOs; instead, leadership will be widely shared in executive teams. New demands for collective responsibility and accountability will emerge, as will competencies for sharing leadership. Not one person only, but more than one person will lead Organisations collectively (Osland 2008, cited in Mendenhall 2008:51-52). Leaders style dynamism is about high performance leadership, developing leadership at all levels, shared leadership, and developing a second in command. A self-empowered leader does not merely take decisions by himself/herself, but empowers others to successfully lead their own teams. Winter (2003) puts it as shaping, growing, influencing and making a positive difference to the performance of people, teams, Organisations and communities. It is everything from executive leadership positions to the leadership that is so vital among the teams and other units that result in high performance. They cross or remove boundaries, bring people and resources together, grow and prune and nurture. Contributions and impact of performance leadership are summarized in Table 2.3. According to him, high performance leaders must harness two energies that are the performance driversmental and relationship energy, and two energies that are performance enablersphysical and emotional energy. Performance leaders can not build and capitalize on the knowledge, creativity and relationships unless their physical energy (endurance) and their emotional energy (resilience) permit. Many leaders invest vast time and effort in increasing their knowledge and relationships and then fail to use these resources because of physical and emotional fatigue.

60

TABLE 2.4 Contributions and Impacts of Performance Leadership

Dimensions of performance Leadership Strategic Leadership Key Contributions Big-picture perspective Stimulates strategic conversations Creates or upholds charter Challenges the status quo Goals alignment Deploy resources Motivate Performance feedback and consequences Sustain and enhance capabilities Facilitate learning Grow new competencies Attract and retain talent Create trust Form new relationships Build networks Reveal and resolve conflict Acts of leadership Uphold the values Provide personal energy Impact Positioned for future success short-and long term Producing results and adding value

Performance Coaching

Development Coaching

Capabilities and competencies suit the strategy Networks relationships adding value to the Organisation Leading by example (Business Athlete)

Performance Relationship

Personal Leadership

Source: Winter (2003:179).

Improving leadership styles by superiors, and making their leadership styles more effective by developing dynamism helps Organisations significantly in business success. Bennis and Nannus, as far back as in 1985, calls effective leadership as one of the key predictors of business success. Subsequently, Kotter also, in his various works and studies on leadership emphasized on more leading and less managing, thus solving many problems associated with leadership (Srivastava and Bhattacharya 2007). Improving leadership style flexibility was chosen as an important component in the team work training program of the Nuclear Power Corporation. To achieve this, the leadership component of the program focused on leading by understanding subordinates, improving interaction styles and developing assertiveness, to help improve leadership process and shift from more of managing to more of influencing and leading. The program used situational leadership concept to increase effectiveness and adaptability in leadership by
61

using an instrument: Leadership Effectiveness and Adaptability Description (LEAD), a situation and maturity dependent instrument which suggests that effective leaders vary their style with the readiness of followers (Exhibit 2.3). EXHIBIT 2.3 Maturity Levels and Leadership Styles of Subordinates
Style Effectiveness Type 3 (Participative: high supportive, low directive behaviour, as in case of employees who have given higher performance for three to four years and have low internal locus of control, get influenced by environment, eventually gradual lowering in willingness levels and commitment and achievement levels getting adversely affected) for subordinates with maturity level 3 (high competence and low willingness). The appropriate strategy to shift to higher maturity levels is largely maintaining a positive approach towards them, having faith and confidence in their competence. The changed behavior is largely because of external factors. Inputs on emotional intelligence, positive attitude, assertive communication, inter personal effectiveness, ego management, and providing behavioral skills may be helpful. Style Effectiveness Type 4 (Delegating, empowering: low interfering, low directive behavior) for subordinates with maturity level 4 (high competence, high commitment and high achievement orientation). Strategy required towards them is keeping them as high performers by adopting such processes as competency mapping, talent management, giving challenging assignments, individual and group rewards, recognitions, etc. Style Effectiveness Type 2 (selling / coaching: with high emphasis on task and high on relationship / supporting behavior, as in case of employees at entry level positions at operative, supervisory or executive levels) for subordinates of maturity level 2 (low in competence, high willingness, commitment and achievement orientation). The appropriate strategy suggested for shifting to higher maturity levels by giving more and more challenging tasks. Motivation will persist; employees will work with higher commitments and higher achievement orientations. On acquisition of relevant job knowledge and relevant experience, maturity levels will be raised and higher competence acquired.

Style Effectiveness Type 1 (telling / directive: with high emphasis on task and low emphasis on relationship) for subordinates with maturity level 1 (with low competence and low willingness). The strategy suggested for shifting to higher maturity levels is by practicing style type 3 in the present scheme of style profiles (participative, high supporting, low directing, giving them opportunity to take up responsibility backed by Organisational support and having faith and confidence in them).

Source: Adapted from Srivastava and Bhattacharya, (2007) and modified from the framework given by Hersey and Blanchard (1982).

Though some reviews had concluded that the situational leadership model has some logical and internal inconsistencies and lacks empirical support, it has been found to be

62

adequately representing reality. Blank et al.s (1990) framework also provides supportive evidences and is based on the assumption that subordinates maturity moderates the relationship of the leadership task relationship behaviors with indicators of leader effectiveness. The leadership traits emphasized in the program was to use more of participative and delegating styles, developing more trust in the employees, give more freedom to act and empower to the extent possible (Srivastava and Bhattacharya, 2007). The review of literature on powerful leadership containing three sub-variables globalization issues; vision, mission and strategies; and leadership dynamism indicate that a number of studies/work has been done related not only to the variable of powerful leadership and all the sub-variables, but also having some bearing on the dependent variable of the studyorganisational excellence. The success of a powerful leader is in evolving a high perfoming culture and the section that follows does a comprehensive review of literature on performance culture and its sub-variablesHR policies and practices; competency/talent management, and team working. The review is done in the context of the dependent variable (Organisational excellence) and the already discussed independent variablepowerful leadershipto have a holistic understanding. PERFORMANCE CULTURE According to Frank (1987), for any given group or Organisation that has had a substantial history, culture is the pattern of basic assumptions that the group has invented, discovered or developed in learning to cope with its problems of external adaptation and internal integration. Basic assumptions have worked well enough to be considered valid and, therefore, taught to new members as the correct way to perceive, think and feel in relation to these problems. Higher Organisational performance demands managing of both external tasks in business environments and internal tasks and in the process, a pattern of perceiving, thinking, and feeling is developed, culminating in automatic assumptions that are unconsciously held within the Organisations, giving rise to a distinct culture. Since the held assumptions in this case are evolved over a period of time, from performance of performance driven tasks, the culture so evolved is performance culture.

63

The surge in the popularity of the Organisational culture construct is attributed in part to the link between Organisational culture and firm effectiveness (Wilderom et al. 2000). Smircich (1983) has been clear that the field of Organisational culture will not flourish much without solid evidence about the culture-performance link and Wilderom et al. (2000) reported scant attention is paid to this. The roots of the culture-performance link can be traced to Hawthorne Studies (Roethlisberger and Dickson 1971) that unearthed the presence of informal social system and shared assumptions and beliefs amongst the workers, thus revealing the presence of Organisational culture even though not termed so during investigation (Baba 1996, cited in Nazir and Lone 2008). Silverzweig and Allen (1976) found that the performance in firms under study increased substantially after incorporating certain changes in their cultures. Ouchi and Jaeger (1978) found that the workers commitment and unitary vision, coupled with certain humanistic values like concern for employees well being and emphasis on consensual decision making, were prime contributors in high performance of Japanese firms. Around the same time, Pascale and Athos (1981) found high productivity in Japanese firms due to concern for high human relations. Peters and Watermans (1982) study also pointed out some kind of superior performance on moving away of companies from technical and rationalist approach towards a more adaptive humanistic approach. Deal and Kennedy (1982) also reported similar findings. Performance culture is drawn from the basic concept of Organisational culture, a concept which without a clear definition is difficult to describe. It is also a widely researched area, which numerous researchers and authors have studies and described. Edgar Schein (1992) describes Organisational culture as a collection of consciously or unconsciously shared ideas, assumptions, and convictions regarding those aspects of reality that are relevant to the Organisation. He regarded culture as one that elicits a strong learning process and gives direction to employee behaviour. Thereby, an employee also strongly draws appropriate direction of behaviour from an Organisations prevailing culture in order to make himself / herself more successful and comfortable, as majority of the employees prefer to go by an unwritten prescription related to acceptable, correct or preferred behaviour. Something is visible from outside (explicit culture) and there are certain core values behind it (implicit culture). Hofstede (1991) describes culture as a
64

collective mental programming of company stakeholders. Culture strongly fulfils important functions of internal integrations (alignment and coordination of internal processes, giving meaning and justification of ones own behaviour, reducing individual security and fear, providing stability, certainty, and security) and external adjustments (anticipating, sensing, and anticipating surrounding developments, identifying with Organisational goals, providing continuity of Organisational performances by emphasizing on the norms and values that make an Organisation prepared for survival) (Schein 1992, Dooreward and de Nijis 1999). Inspired by Schein and Hofstede, Dooreward and de Nijis (1999) divided Organisational culture in two layers(i) an explicit part (the cultural practice), which includes the visible and difficult to decode behavioral patterns and expressions of people, such as business principles, behavioral codes, jargon, myths, ceremonies, rituals and beliefs, and (ii) an implicit part (the core), which includes the unwritten rules, assumptions, expectations, and invisible patterns of thinking that bring about much resistance to change. The first two cultural levels in the Scheins scheme of three successive cultural levels:, the artifacts, which relates to what is written within the Organisation and is visible; the higher level of awareness i.e., the formalized norms (what is allowed or forbidden), and values (what is important) that are open for discussion relate to the cultural practice; and the invisible part of the shared underlying values (principle that function as a starting point and cannot or can hardly be discussed (basic assumptions) relate to the core in the above referred paragraph. Organisation culture also influences motivation, self-guidance, and commitment. It has, in fact, deeper roots. It is expressed in, for instance, the nature of people (good, bad, active, passive, how knowledge is interpreted, respect for individual, performance focus); the nature of personal relations (teamwork, solidarity, dispute, competition); formal statements (such as mission and vision statements); Organisational structure (bureaucratic or self-guiding teams); HRM policy (such as coaching, appraisal, competence development); communication systems (formal, informal, open); specific regulations (rules, guidelines, procedures); and Organisational traditions. Schein (1990) has also given a way as to how an Organisation can develop/build its own culture by way of

65

resolving its relationship with its environment, nature of human activity, reality and truth, perception about time, human nature, human relationships, and homogeneity versus diversity. It is these that make a difference between a performing or a non-performing culture. While giving importance to these is likely to develop greater competency, ignoring these and practicing in a negative way is likely to give rise to greater and greater incompetence in the Organisation. Culture building has both negative and positive sides. Ignoring the negative side, which generally is the case in majority of Organisations, creates incompetence and breaks the confidence of the employees. Models given by Gilbert (1987) and by Landsberg (1999) give powerful insights. Gilberts (1987) behavioral model list some important practices that creates incompetence in the Organisation such as withholding informations, not involving people in selecting the instruments of work, not providing incentives for good performance, not helping people to improve skills, ignoring individuals capacity and ignoring individuals motives. Landsberg (1999) gives another interesting model of breaking employees will by destroying all visions and hope for freedom, suppressing self-confidence, taking away all prospects of voluntary action, telling lies, ridiculing, taking away all possible sensorial incentives, and systematically destroying peoples self-image. Literature is abundant in positive approaches to building powerful Organisational culture (Galpin 1996). The present research, therefore, deals elaborately in Organisations performance culture, which is more performance related. Winter (2003) refers to performance culture as creating, leading and living in a vibrant, high performing Organisation that values performance, and creates the symbols, rituals and practices needed to sustain the culture. According to Evans and Wurster (2000, cited in Winter 2003), creating a high performance environment requires deconstructing traditional hierarchies, creating a culture and make big strategic changes. Successful corporations, such as Quantas, Dell, National Australian Bank, Intel, etc. have re-shaped and continued to sharpen their cultures to meet the new demands of speed, scale and standards. Michael Dell, Chairman and CEO of Dell Computer Corporation, uses the term hypergrowth to describe the challenges faced by his Organisation in the years when it achieved a 30% growth in sales and profit. According to Dell, peoples drive for excellence and constant

66

focus on innovation has helped achieve a higher growth. It is important to have an awareness of culture and the leader must be able to give an appropriate shape to it. High performance culture is dependent on performance leadership and in its absence also, some culture will in any case evolve. It could be non-performance culture instead of performance culture. Assumptions relating to performance culture relate to how the Organisation sets strategy, develops goals, chooses the means for reaching those goals, decides to measure its progress and controls its output, and how to remedy situations that are out of line with goals. It helps to solve the groups basic problems of survival in, and adaptation to, the external environment and integration of its internal process to ensure the capacity to continue to survive and adapt. To achieve a high performing culture, an Organisation has to be have a high concern for issues such as: core mission, primary tasks, manifest and latent functions (to do with evolving a shared concept of its reason to be); means (leading to goal achievement, emergence of style, structure, appropriate technology, basic designs of tasks, division of labor, reward and incentive systems, control and information systems); criteria for measuring results and remedial and repair strategies (judging own performance and taking remedial action on own in case of underperformance); group boundary and criteria for inclusion (new members can not really function if they are insecure about membership, and does not have a way of defining itself and its boundaries); influence and power, peer relationships (capacity to deal with authority problems and establishing workable peer relationships); and allocation of rewards and punishments (the specific rewards and punishments and the manner in which they are administered) (Frank 1987). Evolving of a non-performing culture, even by default, is more damaging than the positive effects arising out of a performing culture by the rigorous efforts of a high performing leadership. An Organisation needs to create meaningful shared values, define a compelling mission and generate focus through clear goals to create a performance culture. Performance cultures accept that adaptation is a part of self-preservation, whereas non-performance cultures typically resist change and try to preserve their current state.

67

Hess (2007) in a study of 22 organic growth winners such as Walgreen, Wal-Mart, ADP, PACCAR, Gentex, Waters Corporation, Harley Davidson, and Bed Bath & Beyond concluded that in successful companies, good (not necessarily the best) employees who are engaged and who are led by humble passionate leaders can compete and win in the marketplace without unique product and services. According to him, how to engage people, the human spirit (their employees) in the quest for operational excellence by treating people fairly is important. SYSCO, according to Hess, is more profitable than its competitors, not because their workers understand its missionHelping our customers succeed but because of the seamless integration of their entrepreneurial culture, which emphasizes ownership, autonomy, employee retention, promoting from within, and performance systems and reward systems. Their measurement systems drive the performance-based culture. According to Raynor (2007), in a more performance-based culture, the business unit would expect to see (a) employee opinion survey scores indicating workforce satisfaction with the management of their performance, (b) voluntary execution of fundamental performance management practices, (c) a shared understanding that performance management is a key leadership responsibility, and not a HR program, (d) high levels of execution for creating performance plans, completing mid-year reviews, submitting employee self-appraisals, and conducting year-end reviews, and (e) appropriate distribution of performance scores and subsequent pay for performance compensation. Frolic and Ariyachandra (2006) suggest a frameworkthe Business Performance Managementthrough the creation and execution of sound business strategy in todays business enterprise operating in the hypercompetitive marketplace. It enables Organisations to effectively monitor, control and manage the implementation of strategic initiatives. Kow (2004) suggests six key elements for a successful turnaround strategy: (i) an appropriate strategic vision; (ii) an Organisational structure; (iii) a set of business processes; (iv) an HR architecture that will support the vision; (v) technological innovation that will nourish the Organisation as well as enhance the product ranges; and (vi) an Organisational culture that will accept and commit to the effort. An appropriate mix of all of these will drive performance improvement.

68

Organisational improvement involves a creative learning process based on strategic vision as well as new values and norms (Rampersad 2003). These Organisations also have highly effective learning systems (Tushman and Nadler 1996). In order for Organisations to realize their learning potential, managers are required to provide the right environment to allow the development of individuals, groups and teams to assimilate and act upon information. What is important, therefore, is that Organisational structure and systems should direct and motivate behaviour towards greater Organisational learning (Common 2004). According to Olsen and Peters (1996b:4) also, development of Organisational learning centered structures and procedures improve the problem-solving capacity of an Organisation and make it better prepared for the future. However, this is fraught with considerable constraints (Common 2004) as argued by Stata (1996:318) that Organisations can only learn when decision makers learn together, come to share beliefs and goals, and are committed to take the action necessary for change, as multiplicity of actors with a stake in public policy in democratic systems undermines this premise. Also, as noted by Stata, though learning builds on Organisational memory based on institutional mechanisms (for eg., policies, strategies and explicit models) used to retain knowledge, public sectors capacity to learn has been damaged by increasing Organisational fragmentation, the artificial separation of policy and service delivery and a preoccupation with performance management through delivery of quantitative targets. The normative theory behind the learning Organisation is usually attributed to Senges five disciplines for Organisational learning (Senge 1990a, 1990b, Senge et al. 1994). Common (2004) observes the conclusions made by Reschenthaler and Thompson (2001:53) who concluded that governments and Organisations within governments have high disadvantages about learning Organisations although they are optimistic about the prospects of change. However, practitioners such as Sir Michael Bichard (2003), regard Senges discipline as appropriate to the public sector, for example shared vision can provide a focus and a framework for learning and development. In the absence of adequate support for the relevance and applicability of the Senges work in the public sector, firm conclusions have not been possible to be drawn (Common 2004). Afsanesh (1993) and Valle (1999) referred to the need for flexibility, adaptability and openness to change among PSEs. Valle also identified three potential implications of
69

continual environmental change in the public sectorincreasing levels of perceived stress, decreasing levels of personal satisfactions, and increased rate of absenteeism and turnover. The public sector will, therefore, have to develop an adaptive and innovative culture. Kotter and Heskett (1992) also identified the adaptive culture as optimal Organisational culture, which can help Organisations anticipate and adapt to environmental changes making superior performance over long periods of time. Bass and Avolio (1993) also have highlighted the importance of adaptive and flexible Organisational culture. In contrast, a transactional culture focuses on everything in terms of explicit and implicit contractual relationships (Bass and Avolio 1993), where everything is worth a certain value and is quantified financially. In this sort of culture, individualism is very strong with a high concern for self-interest than Organisational aims. Employees working in this type of culture do not identify with a mission or vision of their Organisation, and thus commitment is often short-term, existing to the extent of rewards provided by the Organisation (Bass 1998). Within the public sector, due to mounting pressures of globalizations, however, there is an uneasy tension between the need for a cultural revolution of outdated bureaucracies to enhance flexibility and innovations on one hand and the desire to maintain the standards and just procedures for a quality civic service for a broad range of stakeholders, on the other. The tension is for a concomitant need for transformational and transactional at once. Debates about public sector Organisations and performance clearly speak about it. Van Wart and Berman (1999) suggest that move towards flexibility and leanness has been at the expense of the public sector values. Theobold (1997) suggests that public and private sectors culture needs are different. Gordon (1991) believes that cultural assumptions are initially based on industry requirement of success, but in addition are likely to be contributed to by non-industrydriven assumptions gained through problem solving. Thus, demands for industries feed into assumption of best practice for those industries, which in turn guide the creation of industry-specific Organisational cultures. From this perspective, management strategies and processes are derived from the Organisational culture, founded on industrial characteristics (Parry and Proctor-Thomson 2003).

70

Dhar (2005) studied the contributions of an individual department (Rail and Structural Mill) in the performance of an Organisation (Bhilai Steel Plant, a unit of Steel Authority of India Ltd.), which was transformed into a high performance workplace and is emulated by other departments in the plant. This is particularly important as managers have to first prove their mettle by creating and sustaining a high performance department before they could get an opportunity to lead a full-fledged high performance business unit. An important reason how the department could turn around was on making aware to a crosssection of workers regarding the realities faced by the department relating to external environmental changes and its impact on the department. This emotive approach, created a shared vision and aspiration for greatness. It helped in a large-scale commitment building by bringing issues to the surface, and increased task significance (Hackman and Oldman 1980), and also in increasing internality (Dhar 2005). A collective will was created towards higher performance, and performance enhancement through people (PEP), which solved team-based problems for achieving overall objectives (Jain et al. 2003, cited in Dhar 2005). To meet competitiveness, a shift was made in decision making rights by another initiative called STEP (Success through Empowerment of People), in which the decision rights were changed and frontline supervisors were allowed to take decisions related to their work. Even in a daily performance review held by the department, the supervisor would sit next to the managers and go through the same process of review. New responsibilities and roles were established, senior level managers were freed for other duties, leadership roles were cascaded right up to the frontline workers, and self-efficacy was increased with higher internalities. Finally, another initiative Beyond Excellence was designed to address the issues of managerial skill enhancement, job enrichment and job enlargement. For sustained continual improvement, a communication and problem solving forum called Anwarat was launched which helped in enhancing job knowledge, solve problems, post challenges, strengthen teamwork and environment to institutionalize line manager-driven learning. Evolving a high performance culture requires systematically studying the linkages between operations, behaviour and psychological drivers, and using the emotional energy of people to drive and direct change (Dhar 2005).

71

According to Srivastava (2009), Organisational culture is a deep rooted phenomenon, which is the end product of several variables most of them being the offshoots of HR policies and practices. Based on a culture motivation study among managerial groups in two public enterprises, Srivastava reported different set of predictors of managerial motivation in two different public enterprises suggesting that each Organisation is a unique system operating in its own dynamics. According to the study, leadership and teamwork accounted for 53 percent of motivation among managerial personnel in public enterprises. Kirkpatrick (2004) reports performance management systems of Accenture, Pollak Learning Alliances and Army Air Force Exchanger Services (AAFES) and provides useful insights that can help in deciding about the choice of performance management systems. Accenturea global management consulting, technology services and outsourcing companyhad net revenues of US$ 13.67 billion for the fiscal year ending August 31, 2004, and more than 1,10,000 people in 48 eight countries. It sees its employees as its product and focuses on developing staff in the area of value creator, people developer and business operator. It creates a high-performing work environment, universal language to talk about performance, processes for measuring performance against simple, common and global standards, climate of fostering performance transparency and consequences that are aligned to global outcomes. Pollak Learning Alliance, Australia, has created a performance management system that reviews each employees performance in relation to key accountabilities, allows the employee and his/her manager to create a plan for future training needs and aspirations and by creation of personal development plans bi-annually. The AAFES devised its performance management system in 2003 to develop a competent and skilled workforce by establishing a company-wide performance standard in a people-oriented structure. In this system, even though a pay increase can be a result of the performance management process, the purpose is to ensure that associates have the necessary skills to meet AAFESs corporate goals. Kirkpatrick (2004) firmly believes that in order to obtain exceptional employee performance, one needs to build a thorough and consistent appraisal mechanism and

72

coaching program. Performance culture encompasses the whole complex of personal and Organisational vision, mission and goals carried out by a leader amidst globalization issues and the HR policies and practices, competency management and team working. Waterman (1994) stressed strengthening performance culture to make an Organisation a learning Organisation. The three sub-concepts associated with performance cultureHR policies and practices, performance and competency management, and team workingare discussed below. 1. HR Policies and Practices According to Burke and Cooper (2005), Organisational researchers have consistently shown relationships between a range of strategic HRM practices and Organisational effectiveness. Based on a review of research evidences they conclude that HR is the only competitive advantage that an Organisation has today that cannot be copied (Pfeffer, 1994). It is in this context they point out that reinventing HR is vital to continued Organisational success. Huselid et al. (1997) also report a firms HR and human capital to be a new source of competitive advantage because of the new demands facing Organisations due to heightened competition, globalization, and technological advances requiring a need for creativity, innovation, speed, flexibility and efficiency. The critical firms asset resides in people and management systems (Ichniowski et al. 1996). Becker and Huselid (1998) have reported positive relationship between HRM strategies and practices and a firms financial performance. According to Wright et al. (1994), HRM practices influence employee skills through the acquisition development of human capital. According to Ulrich (1997), HR professionals must create policies and practices that will make employees more competitive and be able to position it as a competitive advantage that will add business value. The role of HR professionals has to be highly facilitative and enabling in nature, helping the line personnel to perform the core activities of the Organisation. Line managers need to understand that HRM practices contribute to the build up of Organisational capabilities, which makes it a critical source of competitive advantage. While there is a need for line managers to invest time and resources in expanding Organisational capabilities, they are actually paying more

73

attention to cost cutting, rather than training and development (Burke and Cooper 2005). The most successful companies, however, balance both people and productivity (Waterman 1987, Katzenbach 2000, Cameron et al. 2003). Employees are, today, demanding challenge, recognition, development and ownership from their Organisational employers (Burke and Cooper 2005). Hunan resources, as a function, got its start in the personnel departments of corporate Organisations in the 1930s and 1940s to perform process-oriented functions largely having documentation orientations. The responsibilities included a range of processes spanning the entire life cycle of an individuals employment with an Organisation (Burkholder et al. 2007). Today, HR covers a huge range of functions related to talent management, training, retention, leadership development, managing benefits, employee engagement, wellness benefits, employee legal issues management, etc. According to Boudreau and Ramstad (2001), there apparently exists a perceived lack of alignment between HR and core businesses of the firm. The role of human resources has been a popular research topic in enhancing Organisational performance and sustained competitive advantage (Singh et al. 2008). A broad consensus has emerged on the positive relationship between the use of HR policies and corporate performance (Huselid 1995, MacDuffie 1995, Wood and Albanese 1995, Becker and Gerhart 1996, Huselid and Becker 1996, Ichniowski et al. 1997, Wood and de Menzes 1998, Wood 1999, Appelbaum et al. 2000, Michie and Sheehan 2005). According to Rao (1999), any practice that deals with enhancing competencies, commitment and culture building can be considered an HR practice. These practices can be reflected in various forms like a process, an activity, a norm, a rule, an accepted or expected habit, or just a way of doing things. Similar to HR practices, Lawler et al. (1998) talked about the high performance work systems typically characterized by significant delegation of authority to lower level employees (empowerment), extensive training and development of employees, reliance on pay for performance, etc. LengnickHall and Lengnick-Hall (1988) have emphasized the strategic fit of HR with business strategy. Schuler and Jackson (1987) have viewed HRM as a menu of strategic choices to be made by HR executives intended to promote the most effective role behaviors that are

74

consistent with the Organisation strategy and are aligned with each other. The model was built on the generic competitive strategies outlined by Porter (1980) i.e., quality enhancement, innovation and cost leadership or reduction. For each strategy, Schuler and Jackson (1987) developed a set of needed role behaviors, which vary across a number of dimensions and then recommended a set of HR practices that are needed to bring about these behaviors. Thus, Organisations adopting innovation strategy needs to foster patterns of behavior that are creative, have a long-term focus, a relatively high level of cooperation and interdependence, a moderate concern for quality and quantity, attention to both processes and results, a high degree of risk taking and a high tolerance for ambiguity and unpredictability (Singh et al. 2008). The four basic types of strategies suggested by Miles and Snow (1984a) are defender, prospector, analyzer and reactor. Miles and Snow (1984b) suggest the basic HRM strategy of defenders is to build and maintain human resource by intensive training and capacity building of people. This is supported by Bailey (1993, cited in Singh et al. 2008) that human talent is often underutilized and he argued that certain HR policies such as basic skill training, coaching, mentoring and incentive compensation can provide employees with competencies that are needed to yield returns in excess of any relevant costs. According to Wright and Snell (2005), as firms are facing increasing global competition, rapid technological change and trend toward commoditization of product markets, they have to find ways to leverage human capital better. This requires a massive rethinking of the role of HR and a revolutionary approach to managing people in Organisations. Human resources functions in Organisations are today serving as bureaucratic obstacles rather than drivers of positive change in Organisations (Stewart 1996, Hammonds 2005, Losey et al. 2005). Wolfe et al. (2006) point out that some authors bemoan the current state of HR and some present a coherent plan or vision to change the function. Such change requires radical innovations in how HR professionals design and implement processes aimed at building competitive advantage through people. Many initiatives have been taken even by government departments to develop elaborate HRD plans for achieving radical change at the initiatives of the world bank in various government departments such as health,

75

forestry, agriculture, etc. in different departments of the GoI and fairly good improvement in HR roles have been reported. Power of the innovation champion (those who provide energy and momentum) plays a crucial role (Howell and Higgins 1990, Wolfe 1995). A champions efforts are necessary to counter inherent Organisational resistance to change. A new idea, therefore, either finds a champion or dies (Schon 1963, 1976). Johns (1993) reports that since HRM innovations itself pose threats to vested interests, it also stimulates political activity and power games have to be appropriately handled (Galbraith 1982). Johns (1993) and Rynes et al. (2001) have found out in their research studies that Organisations do not use current or innovative HR best practices. They also were found to be lacking in knowledge about best HR practices (Rynes et al. 2002). Yancey et al. (2003), in their survey of 45 industrial-Organisational psychologists, found out that they shared their research ideas with each others rather than with HR practitioners. Cameron et al. (2003) suggest defining the HRM/OB knowledge base more clearly, and forming alliances with other teaching disciplines having greater legitimacy. While these remain a constraint today, a downward performance spiral has also been noted as Organisations are all out to address real pressing performance problems such as low profits, high costs, poor customer service and low stock prices (Pfeffer 1998). The typical Organisational responses for these include staff layoffs, greater use of part-time and contract staff, a restriction on hiring and promotions, freezes or cutbacks and reduced investments in the training and employee development. The responses of employees, in turn, are in the form of reduced job involvement, lower job satisfaction, and greater turnover. Both together aggravate the situations of a spiral downward performance (Burke and Cooper 2005). However, there is considerable evidence also that use of effective HRM practices increases performance of the firm because employees work both harder and smarter (Pfeffer 1994, 1998). In a study to relate HRM practices (internal career opportunities, formal training systems, appraisal measures, profit sharing, employment security, voice mechanisms and job definitions), Delery and Doty (1996) found that profit-sharing, result-oriented appraisals and employment security were significantly related to two financial performance measures.

76

Pfeffer (1998) shortlisted seven broader HRM practices (employment security, selective hiring, self-managed teams and decentralization, high compensation contingent on performance, training, reduction of status differences and sharing of information) out of the 16 listed earlier to reflect long-standing ideas about how to manage people. According to OReilly and Pfeffer (2000), there is an increasing agreement that the unique competitive advantage Organisations have today lies in their people, their HRM practices and systems and their cultures. They have identified six HRM levers in common across eight outstanding Organisations. These were (i) alignment of values, culture and strategy; (ii) hiring people to fit with values and culture; (iii) investing in the training and development of all staff; (iv) widespread sharing of information; (v) use of team-based systems, and (vi) tying rewards and recognitions to desired behavior and results. All other elements of production (financial, physical plant, technology, products and services) can be readily obtained, bought or copied. For Organisations to be successful in the era of human capital, unleashing the talents of people is needed (OToole and Lawler 2006). The alignment process suggested by Pfeffer (1998) can start first by linking with Organisations strategy, then identifying critical competencies or behaviors that are needed for implementing, developing HRM practices that will support these competencies, and finally checking for internal and external consistencies. The traditional approach to people management focuses on the individual employee performing specific jobs within an Organisational setting (Jackson and Schuler 1995). Traditionally, an individual works on the job, which is seen as a collection of tasks. In keeping with solitary performance of job tasks, teamwork and collaborative skills are seldom assessed. Finally, the compensation system is usually focused on providing individual rewards that recognize and reinforce individual performance. Outstanding individuals are often eligible to receive performance bonuses or recognition awards (Salas et al. 2005). The emphasis on individual rewards often fosters a spirit of competition and the recognition by employees that helping others may come at the expense of their personal profit (McHugh and Bennett 1999). Helping others in the Organisation (for e.g. through Organisational citizenship behaviors) may be valued informally, but is infrequently formally recognized (Salas et al. 2005).

77

Becker and Huselid (1999) have synthesized findings from five case studies carried out by leaders in management of people (Herman Miller, Lucent, Praxair, Quantum, Sears), and made three broad conclusions related to a value-added HR function: (i) it is a business strategy that relies on people as a source of competitive advantage, (ii) it will lead to operational excellence, and (iii) it will require HR managers who understand the human capital implications of business problems and can access or modify the HR systems to solve these problems. Lawler (2003) points out the importance of the relationship between people and Organisation and when they are treated right, a virtuous spiral in contrast to the downward spiral described by Pfeffer (1998) results. For this to happen, Organisations must treat employees in ways that motivate and satisfy them; and employees must behave in ways that help their Organisations become more effective and high performing. This will require insightful, forward-looking managers, skilled management, well thought out management structures, programs and policies designed to motivate employees to perform at peak levels (Burke and Cooper 2005). According to Lawler (2003), Organisations must adopt new attitudes and practices; employees have a responsibility for meeting goals of high Organisational performance. Employees need to take responsibility for their knowledge, skills, development and performance, which will foster a virtuous spiral of success. The seven principles to achieve this are attraction and retention, training and development, work design, mission strategies and goals, reward systems, and leadership. Through this, the HR department can build Organisational capabilities that will drive profitability and top-line growth. Katzenbach (2000), in a study of energized workforce that achieved higher performance than their competitors with similar workforce, identified five balanced paths to key performance: mission, values and pride; process and metrics; entrepreneurial spirit; individual achievement; and reception and celebration. Building on the writings on employee involvement, TQM, re-engineering, empowerment, learning and boundarylessness, Lawler (1996) offers a broader new logic for organizing based on six new principles: (i) Organisation can be the ultimate competitive advantage,

(ii) involvement is the most effective source of control as compared to bureaucracy,

78

(iii) all employees must add significant value as compared to value additions by top management and technical personnel, (iv) lateral processes as opposed to horizontal processes are the key to Organisational effectiveness, (v) Organisations be designed around products and customers than around functions, and (vi) effective leadership as opposed to effective managers as the key to Organisational effectiveness. Collins and Porras (1994), in their research study of 18 outstanding and long-lasting companies (who had outperformed the stock market by a factor of 15) and compared with one of their top competitors, found them to be highly visionary and futuristic, outstanding in daily execution, placed profits after people and products, set challenging and risky goals, built strong cultures, promoted from within, resisted status quo and tried to do continually better. They experimented, took action and made things happen, mistakes were accepted as a necessary cost of doing outstanding business and worked continually to make sure that all parts are as well aligned as possible. According to Collins and Porras (1994) and Burke and Cooper (2005), visionary companies continue to be outstanding performers over long time periods, several generations of leaders, and many product life cycles. Visionary companies require great and charismatic leaders. Collins (2001), in a study of 14 companies that dramatically improved performance and maintained results for 15 years and matched with comparable companies that were unable to move from good to great, found that senior members in good to great companies invested in building the company and not themselves. This required a high degree of personal humility and professional resolve and fearlessness. They focused on recruiting the right people and removing the wrong people, and made best efforts to build a superior executive team. These executives thrived on truth, dialogue, debate and facts, they knew at what they excel at and at what they did not, and had a culture of discipline. The changes made were natural, evolving and cumulative in process over a long period of time.

79

Pfeffer (1994, 1998) noted four internal barriers to adopting best HRM practices(i) CEOs touted as heroes are often those who succeed in the short term by destroying the human system rather than achieving long-term competitive advantage through people; (ii) unproductive theories of human behavior are endorsed, employment relationships are couched in economic transaction terms rather than in human and social terms; (iii) Organisations use language that diminishes trust, cooperation and self-management; and (iv) mangers are resistant to and cynical about the implementation of new HRM practices because of the past history of management practices in their companies where they have experienced deskilling, fighting unions and management control. According to LengnickHall and Lengnick-Hall (2005), HRM function will have three primary roles in the knowledge economy: human capital steward, knowledge facilitator and relationship builder and an additional role of that of rapid development specialist. The relationship among these three roles is depicted in Figure 2.7. FIGURE 2.6 The Indian CEO Competency Model
Socially Responsible Business Excellence Adaptive Thinking Entrepreneurial Drive Excellence in execution Energizing the Team Driving Change Team Leadership Empowerment with Accountability Managing Environment Networking Organisational Awareness Stakeholder Influence Inner Strength Executive Maturity Transcending Self.
Source: Spencer et al. (2007).

The new role of human capital steward requires accumulating, concentrating, conserving, complementing, and recording the collective knowledge, skills and abilities within an

80

Organisation (Hamel and Prahalad, 1993). Organisations will have to develop a deep reservoir of talent among both employees and external co-producers. HR professionals will have to develop both competencies and commitment among diverse group of workers (employees) (Ulrich 1997). HRs role will be keeping the best minds and thinkers engaged. According to Pascale (1999), relationships are the key top Organisational resourcefulness and resilience. HR can contribute to a firms ability to leverage its resources and develop strategic capabilities and core competencies by helping individuals build a strong web of relationships and also play a vital role in facilitating Organisation learning and knowledge sharing between employees, among departments, throughout the Organisation, and with external co-producers (Lengnick-Hall and Lengnick-Hall, 2005). According to Reddy et al. (2000), education and training, performance appraisal and profit are the three important HR processes. Sustainable competitive advantage comes from adopting new mindsets and new practices for which employees need to be exposed to new things and practices. Performance appraisal process needs to be shifted from the domains of old assumptions to total revamping to guide and motivate people towards excellence. As profit is a measure of how well an Organisation is functioning, is effective and is efficient, sharing a portion of the profit so generated with all employees will encourage to think of Organisation as a whole. HRD plays a crucial role in the transformation of enterprises to globally competitive levels. New HR practices, aimed at managing processes involving people and team work at all levels, enables people to utilize their potentials to a large extent and pave the way for success in this globally competitive environment (Reddy et al. 2000). To transform CK Birla, there was a transition made to group focus to leverage people power. The model is known as the CK Birla Group HR Model (Kumar and Venkatesan 2005). According to Salas et al. (2005), work teams and HR practices also need to be aligned. The Center for Effective Organisations reported that 28 percent of the responding Fortune 1000 companies employed at least one self-managed work team. By 1999, the number of survey respondents using such teams had more than doubled to 72 percent (Lawler et al.

81

2001). Salas et al. (2005) point out that there is no end to this and now in the 21st century, work teams have become an integral part of Organisational life. Smaller Organisations have also adopted teams. Training magazines 1992 Industry Report (Gordon, 1992) surveyed the use of teams by Organisations with 100 or more employees. Of the 82 percent of the survey respondents that reported using teams, four team types were widely used: permanent work teams (45 percent), one or more self-managed teams (35 percent), temporary project teams (30 percent), and permanent cross-functional teams (19 percent). Organisations also employed multiple team structures concurrently (Salas et al. 2005). They also reported that different types of team structures are used to accomplish various Organisational objectives. Thus, teams can improve customer satisfaction, service and product quality, and productivity (Gross 1997); make companies more responsive to changes in the business environment (Anon, 2002); can make Organisations be safer (Salas et al. 2001); and also lead to improved employee morale and satisfaction, a stronger link between pay and performance, and increased staffing flexibility (Gross, 1997). All teams, however, have to be aligned to HR practices. No Organisation can shift from individual-based to team-based activities without providing the teams with some form of support, such as compensation and performance management systems that encourage teamwork behaviors (Hackman 1994). The degree and nature of support will vary according to whether the proposed team-based activities are temporary and local in nature or permanent and pervasive across the Organisation (Salas et al. 2005). Early team research tended to be descriptive, seeking to create taxonomies of different team structures and concerned with issues such as determining the ideal size and composition of teams (Sundstorm et al. 1990, Salas et al. 2004). Recently, however, interest has shifted to the role and responsibilities undertaken by the HR function in designing and sustaining teams (Mohrman et al. 1995). HR, which was once viewed as merely a provider of administrative support, is now undergoing a change and has expanded to that of strategic partner (Salas et al. 2005). Proactive HR systems add value by aligning the Organisations employees its human capital, which improves the

82

Organisations ability to successfully implement its strategy (Miller and Cardy 2000, Becker et al. 2001). The past decade, thus, has produced considerable understanding of what high or peak performing Organisations look like. However, considerable gap also exists between what professionals know and what managers (practitioners) docalled by Pfeffer and Sutton (1999) as knowing-doing gap. Burke and Cooper (2008) give several reasons for this gap: (i) much of the writing on peak performing Organisations is written in academic jargon and is difficult to access, (ii) many managers have little time given the demands of their jobs, (iii) some of the writings do not address the immediate issues that managers are facing, and (iv) many of the action strategies require a considerable amount of time to implement and managers are rewarded for the short term. Burke and Cooper (2008) also point out a doing-knowing gap where managers take actionsthough relatively little may be known about the benefits of these actions, the context in which they best work or how to implement them. Managers often follow fads, the advice of gurus, or copy what seems to have worked in Organisations currently getting a lot of publicity, without considering whether their Organisation is similar to other high profile Organisations. 2. Talent/Competency Management Performance and competence management encompasses the process of continuous development of human potential in an Organisation. This helps in continuously delivering top performances with a motivated and developed group of employee (Rampersad 2003). It focuses on maximum development of employees and makes optimal use of their potential to achieve the goals of the Organisation by development of job-related competences focused on the expert fulfillment of jobs. Spencer et al. (2007) have evolved a model of excellence for Indian business leadership. It consists of 11 competencies (i.e. enduring characteristics of the person which help him/ her achieve outstanding results as a CEO in India) and that can be arranged in four groups or clusters (refer to Figure 2.7). Each cluster contains 2-3 related competencies sharing a single purpose.

83

Spencer et al. (2007) point out that the central and most important responsibility of the Indian CMD or CEO is to create a sound and sustainable business model that delivers meaningful value to all internal and external stakeholders in a manner which ensures that the benefits are spread across the spectrum of Indian society. This fundamental task is the core of the Indian CEO model and is directly addressed by the three competencies in the in the competency cluster that they have called as the SCRIBE (Socially Responsible Business Excellence) Cluster of Competencies. This is the ability to make hard decisions about the strategy and its execution and the allocation of resources, keeping firmly in mind the parameters of societal welfare. These are supported by and enacted through three important clusters of competencies, each one reflecting a crucial aspect of the role of the Indian CEO model related to energising the Team, managing the Environment and developing Inner Strength. According to Berger and Berger (2004), competency management requires identifying, selecting and cultivating employees who have demonstrated superior performance or have inspired to achieve superior performance; who embody the core competencies of the Organisation,and are role models whom the Organisation can not afford to lose nor fail to take advantage of their ability; finding, developing and positioning highly qualified backups for key positions critical to the Organisations continuity; and allocating resources (compensation, training, coaching, etc) to employees on their actual or potential contribution to excellence. Berger (2004) identified nine core/institutional competencies, and also attributes related to each competency that Organisations generally use for talent management. They core competencies are action orientation, communications, creativity/innovation, critical judgment, customer orientation, interpersonal skills, leadership, teamwork, and technical/functional expertise. They are mapped and weighted to develop the competency management strategies. According to Berger, the commonly used simple scale for performance measurement is greatly exceeds expectations (5), exceeds expectations (4), meets expectations (3), below expectations (2) and greatly below expectations (1). The most common scale for potential assessment is high potential (5), promotable (4), lateral (3), marginal (2), and none (1). Development of a comprehensive talent management system can help Organisations achieve excellence.

84

Also, Organisations that want to stay competitive must address talent management issues systematically. Organisations recruit talent by following the best selection processes. The same group of talented employees, who have worked for some time in the Organisation and have gone through the natural or planned Organisation development processes, become known as non-talents, difficult and those no longer useful for the Organisation. Some are in the category of talented high performing employees. The major reason for this is that when the employees pass through various stages of their career in the Organisation, they encounter various types of superiors, come across different situations, get cooperation from some, get into trouble due to some, some get softly treated, some crudely and cruelly by pinning down with questions. Different individuals have different effects on themselves. Some have good and positive effectsthey continuously develop competence and capacities, and remain in a positive frame of mind. Some do not make an effort for developing competencythey simply will hold back, and think what will competency do. etc. Some, however, also have bad and negative effects on to them. In hierarchical, horizontal and pyramidal Organisations, every employee is a superior and a subordinate. As a superior, he/she has one form and as a subordinate, he/she has another form. The effect of the various Organisations and human processes results in different kind of superiors and subordinates. For over 20 years, Microsoft maintained advantages over its competitors because of the knowledge and capabilities of its employees. Microsoft employees required a high level of competency due to fast changing technology and the marketplace. Microsofts IT group invested time and resources into identifying and maintaining knowledge competencies. It hired a program manager to take on the issue of knowledge competencies by creating an on-line competency profile for jobs and employees. The project was called Skills Planning Development focused not on entry level competencies, but competencies needed to stay on the knowledge of the workplace (Davenport, 1997).

85

As said earlier, Organisations recruit the best of the talents, but the way they are handled in Organisations, different individuals fall into different performing categoriesaverage or superior performing individuals. They also tend to give different outputs. Organisations have been making concerted efforts to move average performing managers to superior performing managers (Dainty et al. 2005). All individuals having talent may not give the same levels of outputs. Varying outputs by talented individuals across Organisations have been the concern of many Organisations. Therefore, international agencies like the World Bank, Food and Agricultural Organisation of the United Nations, UNDP, UNFPA, DANIDA, etc. all have one thing in common for their developmental projectscompetence and capacity building of the employees in the Organisations they have been funding. Research results of leading research Organisations reveal that about 75 percent of corporate offices were concerned about talent shortages. Senge (1990a) listed mental models as an important essential for creating a learning Organisation. For an Organisation to be a Learning Organisation, its members must have the capacity and skills to create, acquire and transfer knowledge and modify its behavior to reflect the knowledge and skills it has. This means that the Organisation must provide a climate and environment of trust to encourage and emphasize on competency-building processes for its pool of talented employees (Pareek 1997), as well as nurture and develop talent. High employee engagement for increased loyalty and people productivity aim at maintaining talent levels for people driven excellence (Hess 2007). Every Organisation must have competent and more talented employees. Managing them better and taking work out of them is more an art and it is in this context, that it is important to know about managing talents across Organisations. Pareek and Rao (1982, 1991) has given the dimensions of power and trust and resulted in a matrix of four different types of perceived powerOnly I, Only He, Neither and Both and combined with the dimensions of trust to arrive at cooperation or collaboration. The four dimensions of perceived power have been combined with minimum level of trust and arrived at eight behavioral situations, as given in Figure 2.8.

86

FIGURE 2.7 Perceived Power Combined with Minimum Level of Trust

Low Trust Trust High Trust Nurturance Compliance Mutual Sympathy Only I Coercion Exploitation Only He Submission Neither Indifference Both Competition or Individualistic Task Cooperation

Source: Adopted from Pareek and Rao (1982, 1991, pp.196).

Organisations in India have myriads of problems and myriads of consultants for solving problems related to talent management problems. The problem is not merely of talking about the magnitude and importance of talent management problems, but appropriately looking at the problems from a proper perspective and also addressing as it actually exists in the industry today. Definitely, all Organisations try to only attract the best employees, employees with the requisite talents, nurture and develop more talents in them, make the best efforts to keep their talent levels in all situations always high, etc. Unfortunately, due to some kind of Organisational power politics, conflicts, etc., which eventually give rise to political behaviors across Organisations, various individual talents either start building at an accelerated rate or degenerating slowly, leaving employees either exceptionally good and talented, average or bad, problematic employees, with negative attitude, having both high or low talent. Josie Salky (2005) has emphasized that, like other assets, people must be managed for long term. HR professionals need to strongly think of building a long term depth of talent among people within the Organisation. According to him, approach to talent management must not only encompass other HR processes, but become an integral part of the Organisational DNA. Romans and Lardner (2005) described that adopting a holistic and integrated approach to talent management at Becton Dickinson and Company (BD) of Japan, employing 25000 people in 50 countries worldwide from hire to fire helped in doubling revenue in five years. The major talent management strategies at BD included: enlarging the talent pool, acquiring and orienting new ones, assessing coaching and developing strategic skills. During recent years, talent management has been gaining in strategic importance for different Organisations by leading them to significantly

87

improving in strategy execution and achieving operational excellence. Getting the right people in pivotal roles at the right time can create long term Organisational success (Ashton and Morton 2005). A research undertaken by Deloitte and Tauche (2002) mentions that though around three-quarters of business leaders have invested and dedicated resources in talent management, the impact has been relatively less. Much needs to be done for a wider impact and true benefits. Berger (2004) presented a valid talent management model that connects metamorphic dots (HR processes) to develop a cadre of high-talent people for meeting the current and future needs of Organisations. Effective HR processes are needed to power people towards the development of a high caliber talent cadre capable of contributing to sustained and excellent competitive performance. Organisations that are not able to achieve this land up with a pool or mixture of both high and low talent personnel across Organisations. This phenomenon becomes more pronounced in public enterprises. Competency management must, therefore, focus on managing intellectual competencies, emotional competencies and team competencies. Individual competency is a function of the real theoretical knowledge, the relevant job knowledge and the relevant work experience (Hersey and Blanchard, 1982). Competencies are the observable and measurable skills, knowledge, and behaviors that contribute to enhanced employee performance and Organisational success (Berger, 2004). According to Madell and Michalak (2004), two primary forms of competencies existsstrategic and job specific. Strategic competencies reflect the skills, knowledge, and behaviors that link Organisational objectives, shared values, and/or competitive advantage largely comprising leadership, communication effectiveness and business understandings. The focus of job-specific competency is the domain expertise reflecting specific skills and knowledge (more than behaviors) required by employees to be effective in their specific jobs. Boyatzis et al. (2004) have emphasized the importance of abilities from three clusters: cognitive or intellectual ability or systems thinking, self management or intrapersonal ability such as adaptability, and relationship management or inter-personal abilities including inter-personal abilities.

88

Effective leaders use more emotional intelligence competencies every day than others in leadership positions (Goleman 1998). According to Goleman, emotional intelligence (EI) is defined as a set of competencies in managing oneself and others leading to or causing outstanding performance. They work through a neural circuitry emanating in the limbic system (Goleman et al. 2002). They have classified EI in four clustersself-awareness, self-management, social awareness and relationship management comprising 18 competencies (Exhibit 2.4). EXHIBIT 2.4 Emotional Intelligence Clusters
I. Personal Competence: Emotional self-awareness, Accurate self-assessment and Self confidence (in the self-awareness cluster) and Adaptability, Emotional self control, Initiative, Achievement orientation, Trustworthiness, and Optimism (in the Self-Management Cluster) II. Social Competence: Empathy, Service orientation and Organisational Awareness (in the Social Awareness Cluster) and Inspirational leadership, Developing others, Change catalyst, Conflict management, Influence, Teamwork and collaboration (in Relationship Management Cluster).
Source: Adapted from Goleman et al. (2002).

The maturity model by Hersey and Blanchard (1982) also reflects four different categories of employees in the Organisational processesindividuals with low maturity, low to moderate maturity, moderate to high maturity, and high maturity. These maturity levels are certainly not fixed for the individuals for all time in the Organisation, but a continuous movement from one category to other category. This results in people with low maturity or low talent and also people with high maturity or high talent. This occurs naturally with normal Organisational progressions over a period of time. Some employees are eventually called good employees, high performing employees and others low performing, low talent employees. This requires a concerted effort on the part of leaders to move employees with low maturity levels to higher maturity levels (Srivastava and Bhattacharya 2007). Emphasizing on the importance of a talented person, Stevenson (2008) reports that one needs a talented person with the right network to kick-start a field or a discipline to take off. Spencer et al. (2007) report that a major advancement in understanding the effects of competencies on performance came from the catastrophe theory, which is now
89

considered a subset of the complexity theory. Instead of asking only the typical question, which competencies are needed or necessary for outstanding performance?, David McClelland, in a paper published posthumously in 1998, posed the question, How often do you need to show a competency to tip you into outstanding performance? Using competencies above the tipping points, McClelland reported that presidents of the divisions of a large food company received significantly higher bonuses, which were proportional to the profitability of their divisions, as compared to their less profitable peers. Boyatzis replicated this method in 2006 and reported significant findings regarding tipping points in an international consulting firm. The profits from accounts of senior partners were analysed for seven quarters following the assessment of their competencies. Senior partners, using competencies above the tipping point, more than doubled the operating profits from their accounts as compared to the senior partners below the tipping point. Knowing the point at which a persons use of a competency tips him/her into outstanding performance provides vital guidance to managers and leaders. It helps those coaching others to know which competencies are the closest to added value in stimulating outstanding performance. The tipping point is sometimes referred to as a trigger point. Spencer et al. (2007), working on the competencies model provided by Boyatzis (1982), provided a basic contingency model of outstanding performance and called it beyond competencies, where a persons talent, job demands and Organisational environment together comprise a cluster of competencies which are more important than merely a single competency. Boyatzis (1982) concludes that competencies are a critical ingredient to outstanding performance (cited in Spencer et al. 2007). This completes the review of literature on talent and competency management and the section that follows discusses important aspects of the various studies/work done on team working/management as available in the existing literature. 3. Team Management Team working requires developing leadership within teams and this helps in Organisational performance within a university environment (Sivasubramaniam et al. 2002), Success has also been achieved at development of training in transformational

90

leadership at the individual level (Barling et al. 1996, Kirkpatrick and Locke 1996, Kelloway et al. 2000). Senior leadership teams, whose members play complimentary roles, have been chronicled as far back as Homers oral history of the Trojan War (Miles and Watkins 2007). According to them, not much has changed at the top of large Organisations in the past 3000 or so years and today complementary leadership structures are common, and in some cases institutionalized. For example, in a top team of a CEO and a chief operating officer (COO), a CEO is concerned mainly with external issues and the COO focuses on internal matters. Miles and Watkins (2007) argue even though most complex Organisations are run, formally or informally by a team of two or more, far more attention is paid to the CEOs performance and succession than to such issues as how complementary teams should be designed and what happens when their membership changes, especially during a succession process. In their studies of numerous complementary leadership structures, from a close range of consulting relationships, Miles and Watkins (2007) have explored why these structures emerge, what purpose they serve and what challenges they create. They argue that such teams are able to do things that individuals and non-complementary teams can not. However, pursuance of noncompatible goals can not be ruled out and succession also presents challenges. Miles and Watkins (2007) provide four ways of development of effective teams for development of a powerful complementary leadership: i. Increasing demands on the CEOs attention and time for achieving high task complementarities. Executives could be designated to take responsibilities for different businesses or groups of businesses or division, or regions. ii. iii. Fairly clear-cut division of responsibilities is expertise complementarity. cognitive complementarity involving differences in how individuals process information, where one leader creates and communicates compelling vision, crafts breakthrough strategies and another one drives execution through an intense focus on tactics, details and follow-through. iv. Leaders who can also play discrete and complementary social roles. A deeply complementary relationship effectively is shared leadership.

91

Miles and Watkins (2007) also list four pillars of alignment in successful complementary teams: a common vision, common incentives, communication and trust. Attention to minute details as these are necessary to achieve effective team workings. According to Stewart (1991), team development is a generic term which refers to improvements related to functioning of intact work groups. According to him, team building and team development is best possible using training as an intervention of team building and development. Srivastava and Bhattacharya (2007), in a massive team training intervention in the Nuclear Power Corporation of India Ltd., attempted to solve various team problems, strengthen the process of team building and development using a model (Figure 2.9) and highly successful results were achieved. FIGURE 2.8 A Model of Team Building
Stages Forming Storming Norming Performing Adjourning Themes Awareness Conflict Cooperation Productivity Separation Task Outcomes Commitment Clarification Involvement Achievement Recognition Relationship Outcomes Acceptance Belonging Support Pride Satisfaction

Source: Tuckman, B.W. and Jenson, M.A.C. (1977).

As reported by the Corporation, team work was a problem when team training intervention was undertaken in the early 1990s. After successfully organizing some 36 team training programs, training about 1200 employees at levels 3 and 4, team work was a norm everywhere. At present, there is no team work problem, operating stations are operating at almost 100% of the installed capacities without any interruption/shutdown, and time for construction of new projects have been drastically reduced and are comparable with world benchmarks. This model of group development is based on the work of Tuckman (cited in Ribeaux and Poppleton 1978). A group may take hours, days, weeks or even months or years to progress from stage one to stage four, or remain stuck in stage two for their whole life. Also, whenever a member leaves and is replaced by a new individual, by definition, this

92

is a new group. The group, therefore, returns to stage one of group development. Further, a group requires skilled members to progress to stage four. Belbin (1981) identified eight roles based on broad personality typeschairman, shaper, company worker, plant, team worker, resource investigator, monitor-evaluator, and completer-finisher for an effective team management. According to Stewart (1991), an effective team either requires a chairman or a shaperboth are important in good team management. Shapers are required for evening out the chairmans so called directives. Team working, team building and team development can all be said to be components of team management. If there is good team management at the workplace, team working will be good, proper processes related to team building will be carried out, and team development will be good. Team training focuses at the individual level, resulting at individuals performance improvements and also at the Organisational level improving Organisational processes apart from improvement and development of team processes. This makes team management simpler. Stewarts experiences as a training professional are similar and are confident of bringing about a sustained change by training interventions focused at individual, teams and the entire Organisation. The contribution of training and development to Organisational performance and effectiveness is primarily through development of people as individuals, as work groups and as members of the wider Organisation (Stewart 1991). There are two separate ingredients in group workingcontent (the purpose or task of the group), and process (how the group accomplishes the purpose or task). To describe these processes, Lewin coined the term group dynamics (Bennis 1976, French 1984). The role of teams in work Organisations are achievement of tasks and goals and benefits of synergy (Stewart 1991). Atkinsons (1999) proposition that distinction between good and poor project performance as indicated by the project teams meeting cost, time and product quality-related criteria is regarded as the iron triangle of project management (Love et al 1998, Chan and Tam, 2000). According to Gardiner and Stewart (2000), these projects also fail to meet quality-related specifications. Lim and Zain (2000), in their exploratory study of electrical transmission sub-station projects, found that factors causing cost and schedule over-runs included the project teams inexperience, lacking

93

appropriate skills and lacking knowledge, besides construction-project specific problems, such as lack of site supervisors, unusual site conditions, and new project participants unfamiliar with the industry. According to Briner et al. (1996, cited in Norrie and Walker 2004), the most significant successful factors for project teams is that they have a common and shared idea of what difference they are trying to make as a result of the project. A preferred project outcome can be achieved by interactions with various project stakeholders. Organisational leaders must have a clear picture of the strategy the company will implement to achieve the preferred outcome. The leaderships purpose is to define the scope of the project so that its reason-for-being is well understood by those who can influence the projects successful execution. A leaders vision helps the project team articulate the projects objectives, goals and products. As a solution to the dilemma of lacking a clear project vision, Baccarini (1999) and Davis (1995) offer the Logical Framework Method as a tool for defining project success. Norrie and Walker (2004) argue that carrying out these processes within a strategic measurement framework will enhance the clarity of the objectives the team seeks to accomplish. This will help project teams connect specific project objectives to strategic gaps, if any. Based on an interview with most successful teams and managers, Brett et al. (2006) reported that they used four strategies for dealing with problems: adaptation (acknowledging cultural gaps openly and working around them), structural intervention (changing the shape of the team), managerial intervention (setting norms early or bringing in a higher-level manager), and exit (removing the team members when other options have failed).

94

FIGURE 2.9 Identifying the Right Strategy for Team Working

Representative Problems Conflict arises from decision making differences Misunderstanding or stone-walling arises from communication differences Enabling Situational Conditions Team members can attribute a challenge to culture rather than personality Higher-level managers are not available or the team would be embarrassed to involve them The team can be subdivided to mix cultures or expertise Tasks can be subdivided Strategy Adaptation Complicating Factors Team members must be exceptionally aware Negotiating a common understanding takes time If team members arent carefully distributed, subgroups can strengthen preexisting differences Subgroup solutions have to fit back together The teams become overtly dependent on the manager Team members may be sidelined or resistant Talent and training costs are lost

The team is affected by emotional tensions relating to fluency issues or prejudice Team members are inhibited by perceived status differences among teammates Violations of hierarchy have resulted in loss of face Absence of ground rules is causing conflict A team member cannot adjust to the challenge at hand and has become unable to contribute to the project

Structural Intervention

Managerial The problem has produced a higher level Intervention of emotion The team has reached a stalemate A higher-level manager is able and willing to intervene The team is permanent Exit rather than temporary Emotions are beyond the point of intervention Too much face has been lost

Source: Adapted from Brett et al. (2006:65).

According to them, adaptation is the ideal strategy because the teams work effectively to solve its own problem with minimal input from management and, most importantly, learn from their experiences. Brett et al (2006) provide a guideline to identify the right strategy,

95

once both the problem and the enabling situational conditions that apply to the team are identified. Complicating factors are also given to appropriately make teams self managed, autonomous and high performing (Figure 2.10). Cohen and Bailey (1997) and Sundstrom et al. (1990) have categorized teams as fitting into one of five major types: action and negotiation teams, advice and involvement teams, production and service teams, self-managing teams, and project and development teams. Over the years, researchers have identified a number of core set of competencies that are necessary to support all kinds of team structures (Salas and Cannon-Bowers 2000) that cuts across various team structures (Salas et al. 2004). According to them, effective teamwork requires that employees exhibit the following behaviors and/or cognitions: adaptability, mutual performance monitoring, back up, motivating team members, team leadership, closed-loop communication, shared understanding, collective orientation and mutual trust. For successful teamwork to occur, team members must hold a shared mental model about their team-mates, their task requirements and their environment. Team work is a set of interrelated behaviors, actions and decisions that yield a shared and valued outcome. Waterman (1994) point out that success of teams that are largely self-managing underscores the power of giving up control over people to get control of results. He gives various examples of such teams that have made enormous gains in productivity and morale (Exhibit 2.5). Waterman points out that self-managing teams are variously named: self-directed teams, technicians team, high commitment systems, or even super teams and they define one frontier of excellence. Leavitt and Lipman-Blueman (1995) point out that most successful executives do great things fast and they are lively, high achieving, dedicated, completely captivate their members, occupy their minds and hearts to the exclusion of almost everything else. According to Spencer et al. (2007), outstanding leaders use the competencies of energizing the team to ensure that their changes are well executed, and that their Organisation is strengthened with a view to the future. The three competencies used are team leadership (inspiring and protecting team and enabling excellent team performance), driving change (leading Organisation to a sustainable change), and

96

empowerment with accountability (maturity to delegate authority, enabling others to act with purpose and accountability). EXHIBIT 2.5 Examples of Self-managing Teams that have Given Enormous Gains in Productivity and Morale
Proctor and Gamble reports 30-40 percent higher productivity in plants that are team-based than in plants that is not. Self-directed teams at General Mills plant in Covington, Georgia, produce cereal with quality that far exceeds that in other plants. They also generate the fewest number of customer complaints. The mill owners at Chapparal Steel, in Middletown, Texas, form teams to do things like travel around the globe to select their own equipment, which has made them one of the worlds most efficient steel producers. Tektronix Inc., in Beaverton, Oregon, says that one self-managed team turned out as many products in three days as a whole assembly line used to produce in 14 days (Hoerr et al. 1986). Roanoke, Virginias Shenandoahs Life found that it could process 50 percent more paperwork with 10 percent fewer people after it began self-managed teams in the mid-1980s. In General Electrics Canadian operations, self-managed teams of 4-12 people have improved the productivity of the accounts payable, payroll and other financial functions, while making work more meaningful for employees.

Source: Adapted from Waterman (1994:33-34).

According to Kumarmangalam Birla (Chairman, Aditya Birla Group), CEOs should make it visible to others (walk the talk) that meritocracy is given due respect.only then would people see the relevance of HR systems such as Appraisal, Training, etc. According to Rajendra Singh (ex-CMD, DEFL), The CEO has to be an institution builder and a team builderCommunicating with peoplehaving good people skills, reaching out to physically meeting them, supporting them with messages on important occasions, motivating themis a must for a CEO to be successful. Keshub Mahindra (Chairman, Mahindra and Mahindra), points outThe CEO, with respect to his team, will have to inculcate a culture where innovation thrives and enough delegation of authority is done to make the employees feel the freedom to create and innovate (all cited in Spencer et al. 2007).

97

The review of literature itself provides an understanding of the dependent and independent variables of the study of Organisational excellence. They apparently can be seen to be having great bearing of the two independent variablespowerful leadership and performance culture. Perhaps, powerful leadership and high performance culture driven Organisational excellence could be more lasting and sustainable. With the above discussions, the second chapter on the review of literature concludes. The third chapter discusses the details of the research methodology to carry out the study. It discusses briefly the qualitative research methodology followed, its complicacies and implications for an indepth understanding of the phenomena obtaining inside the Organisation. The chapter discusses the actual methodology followed in the context of the relevant theoretical issues related to the qualitative research methodology.

98