Abstract

This research project examines the Effect of leadership style on organizational performance in the synod office BUEA. The main objective of this project was to find out   how effective leadership   styles can affect the performance of an organization. Based on the above objectives relevant literature were thoroughly reviewed.

The research make use of primary   and secondary sources of data through the administration of physical examination and questionnaires and the secondary was from textbook and internet. The study also bring out comparison between theory  and practice and also their differences .The researcher therefore concluded that Leadership style do have an Effective  on  Organizational Performance.

INTRODUCTION

CHAPTER ONE

1.0   Brief   Introduction

The aim of any organization is to survive and sustain its presence by improving performance according to Arslan&staub (2013) with the aim of meeting the need of the highly competitive markets, organizations should increase their performance. As said by earlier researchers, such as (Peterson, Smith, Martorana& Owens, 2003) the role of leadership is critically important for achieving the performance of organization.

On the other hand, it is considered that a company’s success is attributable to organizational performance, employee job satisfaction and employee effective commitment (Bass & Riggio, 2006) (Ducker, 2007). Some studies have suggested that leaders motivate and help their employee by using effective leadership styles to be competitive. Consequently, due to promote standards of quality in the professional developments of the employees of the organization the leader must use the effective leadership styles which will have positive effect on performance.

1.1 Background of the study:

The role of leaders ensuring excellent organization performance cannot be over emphasized. Adequate motivation, suitable work environment, compensation, efficient communication between managers and subordinates play an important role in promoting this goal.

Planning and organization of work is also very crucial in organizational attainment. Some researchers have argued that the most common problems affecting organizational performance in the SYNOD office and other institutions are poor attitude to work among workforce, inefficiency as well as Ineffectiveness of leaders in most places, though others show a                                                                        contrary view.  This will therefore bring us to the origin or rather    evolution over the past years till date.

Leadership is one of the most complex and multifaceted. Phenomena to which organizational and psychological research has been applied. While the term ‘’leader’’ was noted as early as the 1300s (they oxford English dictionary) (1933) and conceptualized even before biblical times, the term leadership has been in existence only since the late 1700s (Stogdill, 1974).

Even then, scientific research on the topic did not begin until the 20 century (bass, 1981). Since that time, however, there has been intensive research on the subject, addressing leadership from a variety of perspectives

Burns [1978] similarly remarked that leadership is one of the most observed and least understood phenomena on earth’’. This problem arises not only in understanding the operation of the theory but also in its definition. Stodgily (1974) claimed that ‘There are almost as many definition of leadership as those who have attempted to define the concept’’. Yet still we persist in trying to explain the key question: what makes an effective leader? This question has engendered considerable interest because leadership requires up powerful and romantic images (Meindl, Elrlich and Dukerich, 1989)

In fact, in these times of rapid change and environmental complexity, leadership has taken on greater importance than ever before.

Given the above, it seems very worthwhile to return to the historical foundations of leadership theory and review the progress that has been made. The purpose of this article is to analyze the major area of leadership research using the taxonomy and nomenclature of evolution and to acknowledge each major leadership research approach in terms of evolutionary eras and periods. This developmental strategy reveals the path along which leadership theory has evolved.

The intent is not to criticize each major theory but rather to categorize the major leadership taught processes, providing a broad framework against which to measure existing leadership theories, and to prescribe future directions. The major leadership eras and periods are presented as follows:

The Evolution of Leadership

The personality, and to prescribe future directions. The major leadership eras and periods are presented as follows:

Era included the first formal leadership theories and represented a beginning in the understanding of the leadership process. That era is divided into the “Great Man period and the Trait period’’. In the former, researchers focused on great men (and some women) in the history of the world, and suggested that a person who copied their personalities and behavior would become a strong leader (Borgotta, Rouch and Bales, 1954, Galton 1969).

The pivotal study in that period was conducted by Bowden (1927), who equated leadership based on inheritance. That process was frustrated, however, when it becomes apparent that many effective leaders had widely different personalities. Furthermore, personalities are extremely difficult to imitate, thereby providing little value to practicing managers.

Leadership theory was advanced only slightly in the trait period, when attempts were made to remove the links with specific individual and simply to develop a number of general traits which if adopted, would enhance leadership potential and performance.

The influence era this improved on the personality era by recognizing that leadership has a relationship between individuals and not a characteristic of the solitary leader. It addressed aspects of power and influence. In the first attempts

Were made to explain leader effectiveness in terms of the source and amount of power they commanded and how it was used.

The behavior era took a completely new direction by emphasizing what leaders do, opposed to their traits or source of power. Leadership was thus defines as a subject of human behavior (Hunt and Larson 1977) which was a major advancement. This however leads us to some definitions now used to refer to the term.

According to Yulk, leadership is ‘’the process of identifying needs, understanding what should be done in what way , influencing others to reach an agreement, making individuals and common works easier to attain predetermined targets (Yulk, 2010).According to another definition, leadership is the ability ‘’to mobilize the structure with mutual behavior and agreement and continue with the situation “. (Sefers and Field, 1990). Leadership can also be defines as a social influence in an effort to reach organizational goals.

In the 19th century, however, studies focused more systematically on identifying characteristics of major figures that should act as a model for training new leaders such studies eventually culminated in the approach called Trait Theory, which concentrate on building lists of general personality traits that, when developed, would increase leadership potential (Sefers & Field 1990).

And a second important perspective of leadership studies is the behavioral approach focusing on understanding the dynamics of leaders’ behavior by studying individuals in leadership positions.

1.2 Statement of Problem

Managing people in organization is part and parcel of management process.

Therefore, managers should realize that people are the critical elements in

Organization and that they should be recognized as being synonymous with the organization. But the problem is, to what extend do manager recognize the fact that employees are synonymous with organization and that they should be adequately motivated so that they can give their best to ensure high performance?

Again the leadership behavior/style is most organization which believes that workers could be treated any how as a result of unemployment situation in the country which makes job switch difficult has resulted in the hardship workers face in their place of work in Cameroon. This style of leadership has an impact on reforming and/or creating organizational culture which

In turn affect organizational performance and commitment, so given this situation, how effective can a leader be to elicit the best response from subordinate and make the highest or least performance. However, some researchers are of the opinion that the most common problem affecting the organizational performance in the synod office and other institution are poor attitude towards among the workface, inefficiency and ineffectiveness of leaders in most places. Others still belief that organization are managed through leadership styles and behavior that are strange to the normal culture.

In view of the above contending issues, it was necessary to look at the effective leadership and organizational performance in Cameroon using the synod office in Buea as a case study. Therefore, this study will be investigating the following:

1. To examine the impact of effective leadership on organizational performance.
2. To know the effect of leadership behaviors on the implementation of the program of the synod office Buea.
3. To find the extent to which the management structure of SYNOD office Buea influences the performance of the organization
4. To suggest recommendation aimed at engendering effective leadership of the SYNOD office Buea

Check Out: Internship Project Reports Topics with Materials