Leadership can have a negative impact on organizationalperformance.

Leaders who are overly dominant or become obsessed withachieving goals can overlook various details in the businessorganization.

Managers and employees may also be less willing to help dominantor extremely critical leaders with accomplishing goals andobjectives.

Dominating leadership creates difficult business relationships. Other companies and business owners avoid dominant leaders who

consistently request financial benefits.

“Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely” – Lord Acton

Incompetent LeaderAn incompetent leader may, for example, not be comfortable with technology or maynot have the foresight to see challenges on the horizon. Whatever the issue, this leader’slack of ability will have a negative affect on the team. Some followers may takeadvantage of the leader’s incompetence while others may not perform optimally simplybecause the leader is incapable of challenging them to do their best. The end result canbe a dysfunctional team where few goals are accomplished.

Rigid LeaderIn the case of a rigid leader, the problem lies in the fact that the leader is unwilling to dothe things required in order for the team to succeed. The key to the leader’s evolvingrole always lies in understanding what the team needs and does not need from theleader in order to perform, so leaders that are not willing to adapt and evolve pose asignificant threat to their team’s success.

Leadership Styles that hamper firm performance

IntemperateEven the most talented leader can lead a team to foreseeable disaster due to a lackof control. An intemperate leader is like a gifted child who is incapable to controllinghis or her basic desires, and thus cannot achieve the higher goals of the team. Theleader’s position of power may be used as a tool to satisfy the leader’s personaldesires. The end result can be devastating to the group through the loss of time andeffort on things unrelated to the end goal.

CallousTeams must be able to make progress; a good leader must ”put team performancefirst”. A callous leader will destroy any good will that exists amongst team membersleading to a fundamental breakdown of trust. The result is often that nobody will bewilling to take risks or put forward new ideas for fear that the leader (or the entireteam) will react with contempt or scorn.

Leadership Styles that hamper firm performance

CorruptThe result of corruption is going to be more corruption. Different team members willreact to this in different ways. Some may feel alienated, others may take advantageof the situation. The worst case scenario is that other team members will want toresort to similar behaviour as the leader.InsularThis can result in the team becoming the needless enemy of people who couldotherwise make valuable contributions to the work of the team. While the team mayhave a great working relationship internally, members are always going to feel asthough they are ”under siege.”EvilRegrettably some of the most evil people such as Hitler have had some of the bestleadership skills. If one is working under an evil leader, it is suggested to focus on ownwelfare and get out immediately, if possible.

Leadership Styles that hamper firm performance

Mark Zuckerberg and Facebook

• Transactional Style of Leadership: It is primarilyconcerned with individualism not collectivism,therefore, it lacks sustainability.

• Zuckerberg thinks Facebook as his own company evenafter making it public. He does not consider thestakeholder’s ownership.

• Massive Ego issues and immaturity to handle anorganization expanding at an exponential rate.

• After it is listed on the share market, there is a consistentdecline in Facebook’s share price which has led tocompany’s financial downturn in the market.

John Sculley and Apple

• Rigid Leader : Non Adaption to the Technology industry.

• He was a brilliant marketer at Pepsi, he proved to bedisastrous as the top manager of a tech company andunsophisticated about the technology field.

• He kicked out Steve Jobs from his own company whohad vision to make Apple the best company inTechnology industry.

• During his tenure, there were infighting among topmanagers and expensive projects that flopped in themarketplace.

• Sculley boosted the price of the Macintosh whenpersonal computer prices were falling.

• The board ousted him in 1993, when Apple was slippingtoward bankruptcy.

Tulsi Tanti and Suzlon

• Suzlon, earlier known for the “Wonder of the Wind World”,now is known more for being the “Third-biggest WealthDestroyer” in India.

• The top leadership and management failed to anticipate theglobal economic crisis and failed to tackle the situation.

• Due to Tanti’s over ambition, Suzlon was financially over-leveraged and expanded beyond capacity.

• Top level exited at the time of decline of Suzlon.

• To grow fast, it went for greenfield expansions andacquisitions, and became cash-negative.

• Suzlon management didn’t take adequate measures toinsulate itself from currency movements and a negativemarket environment.

Mark Pincus and Zynga• Autocratic Leadership Style

• Mark Pincus’s combination of imperial ways and unclearstrategic decision has led to many issues across theorganization among various stakeholders.

• During 2012, many top executive talent left the companydue to his imperial and autocratic attitude.

• Stock Price fell down heavily by almost 75 percent in 2012,which has created dissatisfaction in shareholders.

• Zynga has relied almost entirely on Facebook fordistribution of its games, the type of dependence no future-minded CEO would want, which questions thesustainability of the business model.

Alternate View: Organization Culture

Organization Culture = Bottom Line

• Job autonomy:

• External orientation:

• Interdepartmental orientation:

• Human resource orientation

• Improvement orientation: