THE EFFECTS OF LEADERSHIP STYLES ON TEAM MOTIVATION.

Author:Rahbi, Dana Al
Position::Report
 
FREE EXCERPT

INTRODUCTION

Research on leadership is becoming increasingly common among healthcare professionals (Schneider & Somers, 2006; Uhl-Bien & Marion, 2009). Scholars claim that this perspective is crucial for addressing team motivation in the context of an increasingly turbulent and rapidly changing healthcare services sector (Lichtenstein & Plowman, 2009; Hanson & Ford, 2010). Moreover, team motivation in knowledge-intense organizations is rarely discussed due to the complex nature existing between perspectives on leadership and organizational culture in the healthcare industry (Greenfield, 2007). Hanson & Ford (2010) discussed that the highly complex networks between bureaucratic organizational structures and leadership conventions interactively and mutually support the acceleration of organizational outcomes that lead to successful team motivation (Hanson & Ford, 2010). Enacting effective leadership can drive improvements in team motivation and greatly benefit the dynamics of organizational culture in health care practices (Korner et al., 2015).

For healthcare professionals, the challenge in the composition of team motivation is in overcoming the leadership expectations inherited while maintaining the status quo in a multi-professional rehabilitation organization (Strasser et al., 2005). The healthcare industry represents a set of organisations that are conventionally shaped by the bureaucratic model, separating organisation of work from delivery of work(Penprase & Norris, 2005; Uhl-Bien et al., 2007). In other words, leadership is characterised bya top-down approach (Millward & Bryan, 2005; Murphy, 2005) to achieve maximum unit efficiency (Butler, 2008). Therefore, environments where leadership behavior is constrained by outdated management concepts may limit critical organizational culture dynamics that facilitate the achievement of positive team motivation. In other words, health care organizations gained less from spending on the efforts and resources used for improving the outcomes with the help of traditional leadership methods (Burns, 2001). In order to improve the outcome, there must be a shift from the traditional leadership models to modern leadership models.

The healthcare professionals have to meet the changing demands of the patients, therefore they should focus on catalyzing the process of problem solving, collaboration, team management, and creativity, among others, to become central to efficacious team motivation. (Lemieux-Charles & McGuire, 2006). Successful adaptation of multi-disciplinary team motivation does not necessarily mean organizational restructuring or enhancing an individual's professional or managerial skills and competencies. A multi-professional team level involves professionals of different disciplines who work separately in nature, but work together to achieve organizational outcomes (Epstein, 2014; Tzenalis & Sotiriadou, 2010). Team motivation in the healthcare services industry leads complex adaptive organizations through dynamic processes that require leaders to view both organizations and leadership from different perspectives. Hall (1999) notes that leaders need to understand the importance of a revolutionary management style that encompasses changes in behavioral processes, mediated by the dynamic of organisational culture that affects outcomes. These key causal relations impact the inter- departmental or environmental boundaries of the healthcare industry. Evidence suggests that leaders must counter the current leadership styles to understand the behavior of healthcare professionals typically by transforming the corporate practices by involving the informal leaders. Further, holistic team motivation can be harnessed by increasing the organizational adaptive capacity (Uhl-Bien et al., 2007; Schreiber & Carley, 2008; Tsai, 2011; Al-Sawai, 2013).

This paper argues that most studies on team motivation emphasize team work, linking it to job satisfaction (Korner, 2010; Korner et al., 2015), patient safety (Manser, 2009), team climate and team efficiency (Poulton & West, 1999). Few studies have investigated the effects of dynamic leadership on the role of multi-professional team motivation in healthcare organizations. Earlier research on leadership has produced normative statements on how leadership should be undertaken (Oliver, 2006; Al-Sawai, 2013). Empirical studies have focused on working with individuals (Murphy, 2005; Tsai, 2011) or at a broader organisational level (Osborn & Hunt, 2007). Leadership style at the multi-professional team level has been overlooked. Much evidence onorganisational culture in healthcare staff practices, values and assumptions about their work is available (Korner et al., 2015). However, these studies have failed to appreciate the evolution of organisational systemic dynamics that challenge research on organisational culture in healthcare organizations. Furthermore, it is argued that cultural research among multi-professionals in the healthcare set or has been neglected (Korner et al., 2015). It is necessary to explore how the dynamics of organisation culture determines and/or antecedes multi-professional team motivation in healthcare organizations. Understanding how to enact effective leadership and motivating at the multi-professional team level is an important issue, particularly as teamwork has been shown to be neceassary for providing services in the complex healthcare industry (Hall, 1999; Negreiros et al., 2017). Multi-professional team motivation in the healthcare organization requires further empirical research (Leggat, 2007; Tzenalis & Sotiriadou, 2010; Epstein, 2014). This paper presents literature review that address this issues. This study reports literature that empirically supports the relationship between dynamic leadership and multi-professional team motivation in healthcare organizations, as well the mediating effect of the dynamics of organisational culture in this relationship.

LITERATURE REVIEW

Motivation Theory

Motivation is an essential part of success and business prosperity in the existing dynamic and competitive market. It comprises of an individual's internal characteristics and the external factors that include job factors, individual differences and organizational practices (Gopal & Chowdhury, 2014).

Motivation is the need for and expectation of work and the different factors in the workplace that facilitate team motivation (Bahmanabadi, 2015). It is important for managers to emerge as leaders so that they understand team members' needs and expectations, which drive the organization's culture. Of all the functions that a leader performs, motivating employees is the most important and complex task (Almansour, 2012). A major reason for this is that team motivation attributes change constantly. The major factors that motivate employees are fulfilling of needs, workplace justice, labor expended, employee development programs and policies of reward and appreciation (Hamidifar, 2009).

Motivation in the healthcare industry can be defined as an individual's degree of willingness to exert and maintain the production of effort towards organizational goals. Motivation is closely associated with aspects such as job satisfaction, which drives people to perform. Motivating and satisfying healthcare professionals helps to improve the overall functioning and services of the healthcare system. Healthcare professionals who are poorly motivated have a negative effect on the entire system and individual facilities (Zachariadou et al., 2013).

Motivating teams is more challenging than motivating an individual. Very often, individuals in the team have different beliefs, values and different goals and expectations. A team can be defined as a collection of individuals who have different skill sets; work together to achieve goals and help team members to collaboratively apply different skills (Enbom et al., 2005). It is difficult for a leader to motivate every member of a team based on his or her unique motivating factor. A single motivation strategy has to be selected for the team so that it can be motivated effectively (Clark, 2013). Moreover, motivating a team is often challenging as both intrinsic and extrinsic motivation strategies have to be determined according to the values, beliefs and thinking of the entire team. There can be both positive and negative personalities in a team. Positive personalities help individuals to contribute their unique capabilities and potential effectively (Clark, 2013).

People in the healthcare system may have the expertise, but if they are not motivated, they will not be able to achieve their potential. With the relevance and importance of the team increasing in organizations, the focus is shifting from individual motivation to team motivation. If an individual is motivated in a healthcare organization, this builds trust and motivates others, thereby improving team motivation levels. Burton (2012) posits that non- financial rewards are more powerful motivators than financial incentives. These rewards or recognition can be earned individually or in teams and tend to motivate both teams and individuals. Burton states that group rewards are more positive as they improve team bonding, along with increasing productivity. If employees are allowed to work in teams, they get easily motivated. Moreover, the team is responsible for making important decisions collectively and this can further improve team motivation (Burton, 2012). In healthcare organizations, motivating staff and professionals is also necessary, because nursing staff and other professionals have to deal with high levels of stress.

Humphrey et al. (2009) define a team as a group of people who work actively together to achieve a common purpose and are willing to work to ensure that their objectives are achieved. In a healthcare organization, teams have prime relevance, as it is a multi- disciplinary profession, including nurses...

To continue reading

FREE SIGN UP