Introduction
A leader is someone who motivates subordinates’ confidence and interest. A director should have a vision and knows how to achieve it. A leader should ensure that a squad gets the capital and care they require to achieve their intentions. Leadership is supreme vibrant between superiors and subordinates who want to perceive significant modifications and results that signify their communal objectives. Leadership encompasses the need for change, shared purpose, followers, influence, intention, personal responsibility, and integrity. Becoming a leader involves experiencing many challenges and there is a need to know how to solve the arising problems. Having been a leader in Telkom Company I experienced a contract negotiation challenge and I had to lock out the employees until a contract was reached. This essay is going to analyze the challenges that contributed to the contract negotiation difficulties and reflect on the approaches that could have been taken to avoid such challenges.
Paradigm
Many reasons contributed to the problem during the period of leadership. Application of the old leadership paradigm was the topmost challenge that hindered smooth performance in the company. Leadership is a command self-motivated among superiors and subordinates who need to see significant variations and results that signify their collective objectives. Because I concentrated on enhancing efficiency and control to enhance production, controller governance was also a difficulty. Employees were considered replaceable personnel in the effective organizational machinery. The competition was the norm of the day since I did not believe in defeat. I focused more on the company’s competitors rather than being a facilitator. Diversification avoidance was also a challenge since I was not aware of the value diversity offers. Heroism was also a traditional paradigm that I applied during my leadership in the company and this posed a challenge during the contract negation.
Leadership Theories
Failure to apply the historical theory of leadership posed a major threat in the contract negations. As per Great Man beliefs, headship was anticipated as a solitary “Great Man” who set all things around each other and encouraged others to monitor suit grounded on hereditary features, talents, and aptitudes (Daft, 2018a). I dismissed this approach since it underestimated the past leaders’ talents and attributes, which created a problem in the Telkom firm’s contract management. Contingency theories often referred to as contextual theories, demand leaders to understand their environment and modify their conduct to increase organizational efficiency. Leadership can indeed be considered in isolation from other aspects of a team and organizational environment. During project delivery, my inability to understand the circumstance and modify my conduct to increase my performance management culminated in issues.
According to trait theories, leaders have specific features or characteristics that set them from non-leaders and made a significant contribution to their success. Personal qualities such as enthusiasm, tolerance, consciousness, sincerity, and honesty, as well as intellectual functioning, intelligence, and physical endurance, all made a contribution to contract organizational challenges. Directors and subordinates interact and affect one another, according to relational concepts. Two key relationship ideas are idealized influence and servant administration. Failure to shift one’s thinking about a problematic conventional leadership style, such as dictatorial, has a detrimental influence on the organization. Furthermore, I was not ready to serve my subordinates by assisting them in whatever way they needed help.
Derailment
Derailment was another challenge that affected me during the contract negotiation in the company. Derailment is a phenomenon in which a successful manager achieves a certain degree of success but then falls off course and is unable to grow due to a discrepancy between job requirements and personal talents and attributes. Five deadly flaws contributed to the derailment during the contract negotiation.
The first cause was the performance problem in which I failed to attain the company’s aim. This was a result of consuming too much time promoting politics and myself and failing to pay attention to priorities and fulfilling promises. The second flaw was that I had problems with my relationship with peers, customers, direct reports, and others. This made me critical, manipulative, and insensitive thus the employees lacked trust in me. Difficulty in changing was also a problem since I was not ready to learn from mistakes and feedback. I was not ready to rectify past behaviors for instance; I was not ready to change the style of management to meet new stresses.
Building a strong steering committee was also a stumbling block. Poor direct report administration, failure to get jobs performed through others, and failure to discover and hire the proper personnel were all issues. The sixth issue that leads to derailment is having too limited managerial experience. Outside of my existing position, I was unable to operate successfully or contribute. It was also difficult to comprehend the larger picture when promoted to leadership in overall of numerous functions.
Top Seven Reasons for Executive Derailment
The following are the most important seven triggers for the executive breakdown. The first was responding insensitively, abrasively, intimidatingly, and bullyingly. Appearing cold, distant, and condescending all through contract negotiations was the second factor that contributed to executive disintegration. The third factor in the executive derail was the betrayal of personal confidence. Being extremely ambitious, ego, worrying about another job, and trying to score political points were the fourth and final contributors. The seventh factor was having particular performance issues with the company. The eighth factor was over-management and an inability to delegate or establish a team. Finally, the seventh was the inability to choose excellent employees.
Approaches to Solving the Contract Negotiation Leadership Challenge
Solving employee contract negotiation problems needs a leader to be proactive rather than reactive. All the things a leader does aim to ensure the smooth running of all the organization’s activities. Solving problems concerning employee contract negotiation at the organization requires one to change their leadership style. For instance, I practiced being a change manager instead of a stabilizer when the contract negotiation of employees became a challenge. Executives are not impervious to the pressures of their workers’ expectations. Staff, after all, depends on their managers for a lot of clarification, connectivity, and responsibility, especially when things are sour in contract negotiation.
The function of leaders in organizational change necessitates that they assist others in achieving the goals of their groups. Whether it is normal, day-to-day problems, or more significant improvement projects, this message must be steady. Throughout a leader’s tenure, their communication must be clear and constant. To pledge receptivity, leaders must be able to use their crowd’s preferred contact means (Daft, 2018b). Without this insight, communicating one’s goal and recruiting support might be challenging. Employees expect their bosses to be forthright and be able to solve problems that come with change. This leadership paradigm can change the employees’ thinking on contract negotiations, thereby easing the process.
The leader is also forced to act as a facilitator who guides the team members in all the organizational problems. The capacity of a commander to switch from supervisor to facilitator is dependent on their power to create a clear and public atmosphere in which group members can analyze and express their quality of work without guilt or worry – and be available to assist individuals at all levels of the organization. Imagining this level of openness is far simpler than achieving it. Facilitation skills are required if leaders wish to perform excellent planning, keep individuals active during contract negotiations, and develop meaningful leadership prospects and competencies in their participants.
The leader should also be willing to collaborate with the employees working in their organizations. This will give the employees a sense of belonging and acceptance in the work environment. Studies show that in situations where leaders act as collaborators, the possibility of experiencing problems during contract negotiations is minimal. Leaders who appreciate individual connections and cross-functional partnerships for corporate performance use communication and collaboration skills. These people can enable relationships across various levels of workers and corporate associates and have the endurance to work with significant irritation levels, such as contract discussions and negotiations.
A cooperative front-runner knows that no one can have perfect control over external conditions. Individuals may follow their commands out of fright of retribution, but only by sincerely encouraging and empowering followers can they completely devote themselves to a cause. A participative spearhead aims to encourage people and operate as a squad rather than in order. Workshops are an important aspect of their planning process. They appear to be constantly moving from one conference to the next, conversing with staff. They are always eager to assist their personnel with decisions, including contract discussions.
The contract negotiation challenge can be avoided or reduced if the leader recognizes the existence of diversity in their subjects. This approach can help the leader understand their employees better and would therefore expect a difference during the negotiation of a contract. Diversity in management provides more scope and depth of knowledge and viewpoint, enabling better communication with workers, prospects, and potential clients. The invention is facilitated by experience, viewpoint, and approachability, which is crucial for obtaining and keeping marketplace share. Entrepreneurs with mixed origins are more inclined to take risks that the top management crowd approves and executes good developments.
In contrast, leaders lacking diversity seem to be more liable to produce ostracised conclusions and practice less beneficial variations. Our life circumstances form a significant prism by which we outlook and interact with the creation around us. When one broadens their range of perspectives on the management team, they better understand the environment the company must traverse to excel in personnel requirements, customer experiences, social consequences, and global potential.
Diverse governance teams bring different viewpoints to the table, allowing preconceptions and judgments to be put in the check. This will lead to the detection of new habits of understanding, the elevation of a strong mentality, and the creation of a training business ready to test fresh concepts. This benefits the company by increasing employee involvement, accountability, and decision-making speed during contract negotiations. Putting together an elevated, diversified team requires time and commitment. This work is compensated with superior corporate strategy, the capacity to recruit and keep top employees, and much more. Top achievers and future leaders would like to be represented at the top. End-users benefit the most from having their perspective reflected at the table.
Conclusion
In conclusion, contract negotiation issues should be handled with care to ensure that both the employees and the management are satisfied. A proficient manager can handle most of an organization’s problems and ensure that their subjects are satisfied. Leadership will be unable to encourage people without good mindsets, and progress will be nearly difficult to achieve without inspired personnel. Workers and managerial staff must deliver each other the tools and encouragement they want during the contract agreement rather than start fluctuating and finish the agreement process.
References
Daft, R. (2018a). What Does It Mean to Be a Leader? In R. Daft, The Leadership Experience (7th ed., pp. 15-29). Cengage Learning.
Daft, R. (2018b). Traits, Behaviors, and Relationships. In R. Daft, The Leadership Experience (7th ed., pp. 29-43). Cengage Learning.