Cost of Capital

...

2.2 Steps that leaders can take to change negative perceptions about them

The responses at to this question were mainly in relation to the negative perceptions of which the following response were given:

- The leaders can create an environment where the followers can be heard and there must be ‘two way’ communication and have open information sharing sessions

- Leaders can look to have confidence in the followers and not macro manage them and show that they do not trust them to make informed decisions. They can also develop written procedures as guidance without stifling creativity and innovation.

- Leader need to treat them fairly and be supportive of their ideas.

- Leaders need to respect them as followers and employees and not treat them as tools. This can be done through the funding of peripheral programs that benefit follower’s growth.

- Leaders need to treat everyone equally and not have favorites.

- Leaders need to be qualified for their positions.

In all of the responses, the telling ones are the ones where they view some of their leaders as having favorites. This might be a situation where the leader has a high-exchange relationship with some of the subordinates and the others follower view this as a form of favoritism. Leaders need to be extra carefully as to not alienate the other followers or subordinates. The other telling response was that some of the leaders need to be qualified for the positions in order for them to change negative perceptions about them. Just as leaders make attributions about follower competence, followers make attributions about leader competence and intentions (Yukl 2013). In turn leaders who are deemed to be adequately qualified for the job, poor performance might be viewed and being caused by external factors rather than in. While the opposite is true for leaders who are deemed not to be qualified or experienced for the job.

2.3 Attributes that followers must have to persuade leaders to respect and trust them more.

The followers had limited response to this question as it involved a fair amount of introspection, compared to the previous two questions which they were relatively vocal in their response. This comes as not much of a surprise considering that they felt as if they were not listened to and that the communication was only one way. Below is some of the attributes that followers at the operational level felt they needed to have in order to develop trust and respect from their leaders:

- Honesty

- Trustworthy

- Punctuality

- Respect for others including the leader.

- Dependable

- Dedication

- Self-starters

- Adaptive

3. Business level

Many members of an organization have a dual role in that they are leaders and followers (Yukl 2013). This is the case with a lot of the respondents who are mostly leaders for the respondents at operational level but are also followers to respondents at corporate level. To be effective in both roles simultaneously, it is necessary to find a way to integrate them.

3.1 Characteristics of leaders viewed as negative

The group at business level had a wide range of characteristics that they viewed as negative form their leaders. The most common one was that they found their leaders overbearing and in some cases micro managing. The case of what might be perceived as micro managing is a curious one, in the sense that it illustrates that at this level both power and influence is used by the leaders in order to get things done. Power in the sense that the leader might still want things to be done a certain way while also letting the follower do a lot on their own and through consultation. This is the point where most at this level felt like the leader must just leave them to their elements and comment on the final result.

The other common response was that most found their leaders to be not open to their contributions especially when it came to budgets. The follower in this regard will like to see participative type of leadership. Often called the democratic leadership style, participative leadership values the input of team members and peers, but the responsibility of making the final decision rests with the participative leader. Participative leadership boosts employee morale because employees make contributions to the decision-making process. (Yukl 2013). Some leaders were seen not too openly show commitment to the vision and at times hiding their negative thinking about their own leaders as they are the ‘middle’ management and therefore being leaders that are led by other leaders.

These responses were quite telling in the sense that they opened a window into the type of leader-member exchange between the respondents at business level and their leaders. The fact that most feel that the leaders are overbearing and don’t communicate with them in important decisions means that they have a low-exchange relationship with their leaders. A few studies found that a leader’s upward dyadic relationship affects downward dyadic relationships (Cashman, Dansereau, Graen, & Haga, 1976; Graen, Cashman, Ginsburgh, & Schiemann, 1977).

A manager who has a favorable exchange relationship with the boss is more likely to establish a favorable exchange relationship with subordinates (Yukl 2012). This seems to be the case in this study as the respondents at business level don’t seem to have a high-exchange relationship with their leaders and the same is true for respondents at operations level who have similar yet more pronounced negative characteristics of their leaders.

3.2 Steps that leaders can take to change negative perceptions about them

There were a number of steps that the respondents mentioned as the best that leaders can take into account in order to change the negative perceptions about them. The respondents’ mentioned trust, in the sense that the leaders must be able to trust them so that they can grow and have confidence in their own decisions without second guessing themselves. The other response that was prevalent with most respondents at this level was support, followers at this level felt that more support could be given by corporate as well as more considerations