Market success and competitive advantages are at the core of enterprises. Increased high performance in the workplace requires the integration of work, people, technology, and information with an enterprise's strategies and culture. At the same time, effective and dynamic leadership provides positive support guiding, encouraging and rewarding motivation facilitating knowledge acquisition, as well as innovation and creativity promotion (Pickett, 1998).
The manner in which managers and leaders can contribute to achieve anenterprise's goals and improve collaborators' personal success has been well analyzed by authors such as Kotter (1996), Drucker (1988, 2007), McGregor (1960), Rappaport (1981), Mitzberg and Quinn (1998) and Hamel (1996), all of them deep researchers about styles of leadership and managerialism. However, innovation is a multi-folded construct. Besides the phenomenon itself, the innovation process and the instruments of its management are especially focused on organization, particularly the people in an organization driving it. An important role for innovation success can be credited to people driving it along the process (Markham & Griffin, 1998).
Following the imminent effect of internal innovation in organization processes, values and philosophy comes the importance of power distance perception and innovative leadership. Hofstede's first dimension confirmed the importance of power and described how long power distance perception promotes violence and unconformity, opposite from short distance power perception structures where societies strive for power equalization and demand justification for power inequalities (Hofstede, 1984).
Time gives answers and hard lessons; there are a lot of examples through history about bad collaborators that have managed with authoritarianism. It unleashed low productivity, short periods of success, employee dissatisfaction, as well employee unconformity or even strikes. This is because collaborators are the most important element of companies, included implicitly subordinates and superiors who have in their hands the company's future and present.
An enterprise's internal interaction affects positively or negatively the achievement of collaborative goals, like better productivity, processes, manufacturing and especially the acquisition of modern innovation practices. First and foremost, innovation is driven by people (Mansfeld, 2010). The management of innovation acquisition requires collaborators, leaders and managers who commit themselves and their experience with enthusiasm and self-motivation to that idea.
With the recent creation of innovative disruptive practices, companies are forced to promote competitiveness through new ways of internal dynamics. Those ideas about power and hierarchy are combined using new styles of management and leadership.
One of the most powerful currents addressed in this analysis is the one proposed by Ouchi (1982) in which the hierarchical organization of power is viewed like a mixture of high profits with widely diffused feelings of psychological success. We also include Ouchi's theory about management style that not only yields greater productivity and profitability, but also higher degrees of worker satisfaction. Instead of the aforementioned, the combination occurs when organizational-hierarchical clans are changed into the minimum of hierarchical control, becoming "a true fusion of individual and organizational goals."
It is recently known that power has shifted away from managers or CEOs. The days of an "imperial CEO" are gone for many companies; a new period of management and leadership styles seems to be coming. It is based on better ethical practices and programed management lapses in which companies give new leaders opportunities to become temporary managers, sharing or giving other colleagues the power to lead and realize personal and the company's weakness and strength potential, (Karlsson, Aguirre, & Rivera, 2017).
There are consequences to a wrong mix between management and leadership styles. Power does not simply have a legal basis; it means status and knowledge too, hence, legitimacy and influence (Smelser & Swedberg, 1994). The organizations without these characteristics are perceived to have loose internal credibility, focus and high expectations by collaborators.
An important role for innovation success can be credited to people driving the innovation along the process (Markham & Griffin, 1998). According to the previous statement, companies should consider highly important the recognition of collaborators who lead individuals to get their own goals collaboratively, at the same time as running innovation practices, or otherwise organizations must pay high rates on transaction costs for not having the right person in the right position encouraging innovation acquisition (Keim & Madhavan, 1997).
Enterprises should identify and even measure empathy and leadership between collaborators in...