Leadership Effects on Innovation Propensity

Question: Discuss about the Leadership Effects on Innovation Propensity. Answer: Introduction: The beginning of the 19th century saw a rise in the innovation sector as is evidenced by the immense industrial revolution. It gave a rise in the use of technology and thus it witnessed a subsequent increase in the standard of living of the common people. This essay critically discusses the theories of innovation, change and leadership of innovation and change. It then moves on to discussing two of the instances of innovation and change of the present day. Finally, the write up projects a self-assessment of leadership skills of the writer, focusing on the strengths and weaknesses. In the initial phase of the 20th century, Everett M. Rogers, the leading theorist propounded the Diffusion of Innovation. He defined the term as the process by which an innovation is communicated through certain channels over time among the members of a social system. The diffusion of innovation is divided into five distinct stages. They are awareness, evaluation, trial, interest and adoption. Awareness is the stage in which the people become aware of an innovation. It then moves on to the stage of interest, in which an individual gets interested in the new idea and therefore tries to seek additional information about it. In the evaluation stage, an individual mentally prepares to adopt the innovation and applies it mentally to the present and anticipated future. Rogers evaluates whether or not to try the innovation. In the trial stage, the individual makes a full use of the innovation and tries it personally. Adoption stage calls for the adoption and use of the innovation by the ind ividual (Sznajd 2013). According to Nan, Zmud and Yetgin (2014), the five stages of the theory was later amended to the following: persuasion, implementation, decision, knowledge, and confirmation. Knowledge is the new idea, and the individuals of the society having an understanding about the idea. During this stage, the innovation is not yet found out by the individuals. Persuasion is the stage where individuals try to find out about the new innovation. An individual actively tries to find out more about the innovation. In the decision stage, the individuals of a society decide whether or not the innovation has to be bought or adopted (Nan, Zmud and Yetgin 2014). In this stage, the individuals weigh in the pros and cons of adopting the innovation. In the implementation stage, the consumer of a product decides to give a trial to the product that he wants to purchase. He or she decides on the usefulness of the innovation and then takes a decision as to whether to purchase the product or not. According to Bu kin (2015), the confirmation stage is the stage where an individual accepts or rejects the innovation depending upon the potential of the innovation (Bukin 2015). In the year 1962, Rogers came out with the theory of diffusion of innovation to properly understand the process by which an innovation is perceived and adopted by the society. Innovation is the basic backbone of a nation. It forms the basic framework on which a country operates and develops. It helps the country to move ahead and reach the desired level of prosperity. The process of the diffusion of innovation theory has five distinct stages based on the adoption rate of an innovation. They are early adopters, innovators, late majority, early majority and laggards. The diffusion of innovation theory in the present day and age has a lot of takers. The theory of diffusion of innovation has a lot of strengths and weaknesses. According to OMahoney (2016), the strength of this theory lies in its applicability in the world of today. The theory offers a significant advancement over the previous theories (OMahoney 2016). The theory is very practical and is consistent with all the findings from all the surveys and experiments. It was the foundation for numerous promotional communication and marketing theories (Hayes 2014). Despite all these strengths of this theory, there are many weaknesses of this theory also. On the contrary, Di Benedetto (2015) said that one of the main weaknesses of the theory is that it is of a linear structure and is source-dominated. It is so because it presents the view from the perspective of the elite class. Another weakness of this theory is that it undermines the power of media. It gives importance to different types of peo ple who are important to the process of diffusion. Rogers failed to take into account the fact that media can also be used to provide a basis for group discussion. Another main weakness of the theory is that it inspires acceptance by groups who is not positive about the innovation (Di Benedetto 2015). This theory explores the stages through which an innovation passes down from the stage of manufacturing to the stage of availability to the consumers. The outcome of the theory is that it gives the idea of the stages that goes in the process of the distribution of an innovation in the market. The theory helps in the understanding of the stages through which a product passes in the market. The outcome can help us to understand the process of diffusion of an innovation. The theory can help us to understand the stages and thus analyze the process that goes on in the distribution of any new idea or innovation in the market. The outcome can help us to understand the process in which a product or an innovation, which might be an idea also, gets distributed in the world market. The understanding of the outcome can help us in getting a better perception of the stages of diffusion of an innovation, which can help to create successful planning of product launch in the future. The change management theory incorporates five building blocks of successful change. They are awareness, desire, knowledge, ability and reinforcement (ADKAR). The theory talks about the ability to implement new skills and the ability to implement the change and understands the barrier that may hinder in implementing the change. It talks about the reinforcement to sustain the change and the mechanisms that are needed to keep the change in place. It also takes into account the recognition, rewards, incentives and successes. The ADKAR describes the key building blocks for a successful change (Day and Shannon 2015). According to Cameron and Green (2015), the theory essentially outlines knowledge, tools, resources, and the systematic approach to deal with change (Cameron and Green 2015). However, from Rock (2014), it can be also known that the theory shows how teams and people are influenced by a change in an organization. It deals with various disciplines that range from information tech nology to social, behavioral sciences, and business solution (Rock 2014). According to Hughes et al. (2016), change is pivotal and necessary in all organizations. It is an invariable process. However, the way the change is initiated, can vary from organization to organization. It can come as an external force or sometimes from the realization that some kind of change is necessary. The change in an organization allows companies to compete in a better way. It is required so that the company is better equipped to compete with its rivals (Hughes et al. 2016). According to Pugh (2016), it helps an organization to better understand the current trends and thus change keeping in mind the current trends of a market. It helps the individuals or the employees to better understand the need for change in an organization. It helps to understand the reason why the change was necessary. With the change, individuals will have a stake that is greater in the outcome since they help to implement the plan (Pugh 2016). However, according to Kazmi and Naarananoja (2014), there are certain weaknesses or disadvantages that this theory brings. In an organization if change is not implemented properly or clearly, then it can cause the failure of any project. If there is a lack of a thorough understanding of the culture of the organization amongst the employees, then it may lead to incorrect or corrupt information about the change. A bad change management plan can ruin the future of the company. Any kind of change brings with it a certain amount of negatives. Employees of an organization need to understand the after-effect and the repercussion of absorbing a change in an organization (Kazmi and Naarananoja 2014). This theory is essentially used to gauge the steps through which a product is adapted by the consumers. It depicts the five distinct stages through which a change is implemented. It discusses the force that brings along the change and the things that are required to keep the change in place. The outcome of the theory is that it provides a better understanding of the procedure of change in an organization. It helps to get a keen understanding of the stages of change. The outcome of the theory can help us in understanding the procedure of implementation of change in a company. In the future, it can help in implementing the plan for a change in a company. To bring about a change in a professional institution, the management must have a clear understanding of the outcome of the theory. Innovations and changes can be implemented in an organization only with the help of a capable and strong leader. Innovation leadership is a technique and philosophy that combines different kind of leadership styles to influence the workers to embrace new technologies and produce creative products, ideas and services. Encouraging creativity, supervisory encouragement, work group encouragement and organizational encouragement, all play a crucial role in deciding the adoption of change or innovation in an organization that can come in only with the help of a strong leader. A successful leader always finds out ways to make the innovation appealing to the employees of an organization to bring about a change in the organization. The theory is used to find out different kinds of leadership styles that is necessary in an organization. The outcome of the theory is to find out the way that a leader in an organization must function in order to bring about a change. The outcome can help us in understanding the new technicalities of the change that might affect the organization. The outcome can help the future managers to understand the need for a change in a company and help the employees to be motivated and open to bringing in the change. To illustrate these theories two instances of innovation can be taken into consideration: one successful and another one a lesser successful. 2007 witnessed Indias largest company in commercial and automobile sector, Tata Motors launching a four-seater car for a price of just 1450 Euro. This innovation from the house of Tata Motors became the worlds cheapest car where the company deliberately lessened the cost of production reducing the performance of the car and directing its focus towards low-cost design. Tata Nano is a product that has been poised out of eminent technological solutions like procedure of plastic in place of metal, indistinguishable and modular components. Tata Nano became a product drilled out of the companys successful innovation strategy, which is worth to be emulated by its rival in future years. People loved what they saw and Tata Nanos sale got bigger and better. The car did put India on the global map and Tata Nano was deemed a path breaker. Having a big brand name does not always guarantees success, Pfizer found that out when they made a fatal mistake of associating an identifiable brand name to something that was essentially out of nature. Ben-Gay aspirin was not the product people liked swallowing to ease off the pain, that taste of aspirin was more like the pain-relieving balm from the same brand that people demanded to let go their pain. The burning sensation that people talked about negated the companys idea of an aspirin product as a substitute of the balm. As is exemplified from the instance above, the transformational leadership skills is something that I would personally prefer. The transformational leadership entails the incorporation of change in a particular organization to bring about an overall alteration of the existing workings of a company. By adopting this type of leadership, I would be clear as to what kind of change is required to make my company succeed and develop in this fast and competitive world. I would prefer to challenge the status quo of the organization by introducing a new and innovative method of doing something. I would like to introduce new and creative innovations into the organization in order to make the company more successful. As this type of leadership indicates, I would work with my juniors and subordinates to find out the change that is needed in the company (Avolio and Yammarino 2013). I would try to inspire and begin the procedure of implementing the change in the company. The strengths of adopting this approach of leadership are that it will help to find a better way of doing things in an organization, I will have an edge over identifying the areas of the company that are not working, I can cater to many niche markets and explore the possibility. The weakness of adopting this type of leadership is that many people can be wary of the amount of risk involved in this procedure and it can put off people who are resistant to any type of change. References: Avolio, B.J. and Yammarino, F.J. eds., 2013. Introduction to, and overview of, transformational and charismatic leadership. InTransformational and Charismatic Leadership: The Road Ahead 10th Anniversary Edition(pp. xxvii-xxxiii). Emerald Group Publishing Limited. Breevaart, K., Bakker, A., Hetland, J., Demerouti, E., Olsen, O.K. and Espevik, R., 2014. Daily transactional and transformational leadership and daily employee engagement.Journal of occupational and organizational psychology,87(1), pp.138-157. Bukin, K., 2015. Diffusion of innovation: a model of evolutionary processes.Economic Policy,6. Cameron, E. and Green, M., 2015.Making sense of change management: a complete guide to the models, tools and techniques of organizational change. Kogan Page Publishers. Day, G. and Shannon, E.A., 2015. Leading and managing change.Leading and Managing Health Services: An Australasian Perspective, pp.295-304. Di Benedetto, C.A., 2015. Diffusion of innovation.Wiley Encyclopedia of Management. Hayes, J., 2014.The theory and practice of change management. Palgrave Macmillan. Hughes, D.L., Dwivedi, Y.K., Simintiras, A.C. and Rana, N.P., 2016. Change Management. InSuccess and Failure of IS/IT Projects(pp. 57-65). Springer International Publishing. Kazmi, S.A.Z. and Naarananoja, M., 2014. Collection of Change Management Models-An opportunity to Make the Best Choice from the Various Organizational Transformational Techniques.GSTF Business Review (GBR),3(3), p.1. Nan, N., Zmud, R. and Yetgin, E., 2014. A complex adaptive systems perspective of innovation diffusion: an integrated theory and validated virtual laboratory.Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory,20(1), pp.52-88. O'Mahoney, J., 2016. Archetypes of Translation: Recommendations for Dialogue.International Journal of Management Reviews,18(3), pp.333-350. Pugh, L., 2016.Change management in information services. Routledge. Rock, D., 2014.Quiet leadership. HarperCollins e-books. Ryan, J.C. and Tipu, S.A., 2013. Leadership effects on innovation propensity: A two-factor full range leadership model.Journal of Business Research,66(10), pp.2116-2129. Sznajd-Weron, K., 2013. Diffusion of innovation.