以Toyota為例分析企業領導方式和管理變革的重要性

引言

領導能力是一種通過一種非強迫的影響力去形成企業的目標，定義企業的文化，激勵員工的行為。領導的方式有三種，即專制式的領導，民主式的領導和放任式的領導。企業在管理的過程之中總會遇到一些危機的時刻，然而一種管理的變革是否必要，是一個需要綜合分析的問題了。Toyota是在世界范圍內成功管理的范例了，豐田公司董事會主席奧田碩是一位出色的管理家。他對豐田的獨特管理將通過管理的各種方式在這篇文章中得到充分的分析。

Question 1

When it comes to leadership style， Awan and Mahmood (2010， pp.259) stated that the autocratic leader controls the teammate and uses unilateralism to achieve a goal. The relationship creates passive influence in management. Hence， the autocratic style is inappropriate in majority organization. However， autocratic style has unique advantage in some special environment.

Involved as another necessary part of leadership style， democratic style is widely used. Although the democratic style sounds reasonable， it is a sword of two edges. Starrat(2001，p.341) said that democratic leader consults his teammate for making decision however he plays a central role in his team. A good democratic leader should give teammate enough liberty to achieve team’s goal though mutual understanding and promote participation and freedom in organization. However， the democratic leadership maybe create confusion in management. Hence， the key point of democratic style is separate leader and teammate’s duty and right reasonably.

Last but not least， laissez faire style plays an important role in management as well. Bittel(1989) maintains that laissez faire leader does not interpose the affairs of teammates slightly showing the control in the group and participation of leader is low in the activities of followers. More and more followers and teammates wish to participate in management and to obtain more free space. Otherwise， the special leadership style will create passive influence to primary management system. And this style should be accepted in high consciousness followers.

Question 2

Okuda’s leadership is a new style leadership. It combines the democratic leadership and automatic leadership. According to the new style leadership， Toyota solved so many problems and passed the crisis. In the situation of internal differences appeal in Toyota， the autocratic leadership style helps Okuda to make a key decision. In addition， Okuda distributes rights to subordinate and change the long-standing promotion system in his democratic leadership style.

In the case of Taiwan， Toyota scraps the project that was tried to build a manufacturing facility originally. According to the Taiwanese government’s demand， high local content， technology transfer and guaranteed exports， the project does not have any profits seemingly. However， Okuda insists on building a manufacturing facility in Taiwan. He found that building a manufacturing facility in Taiwan is now very profitable for Toyota. Okuda insists on his opinion although it is against to other people’s opinion. It is a significant case about Okuda’s autocratic leadership style in management.

In the other part， democratic style also appears in Okuda’s leadership. It is well known that bureaucracy is a big obstacle in democratic leadership circumstance. Furthermore， the bureaucracy makes Toyota’s management and leadership system become more and more inefficient. The key of the revolution is changing the highest-ranking executives. Reducing Toyota family’s power in highest-ranking executives is a necessary step for building a democratic leadership environment in Toyota. Therefore， Okuda revamped Toyota’s promotion system based on seniority， adding performance as a factor. Now， the majority people rather than Toyota family or a single person controls Toyota.

Question 3

With the development of company， it has to face various challenges and crisis. Ulmer et al. (2007， p.7) defined the crisis as a specific， unexpected， non-routine and uncertain phenomenon. The leadership should have a radical change when the crisis and problem appear in high level of management. For instance， the burdensome bureaucracy and negative promotion system become majority obstacles in Toyota. Okuda have to change the leadership to alleviate the crisis which comes from bureaucracy and promotion system. However， a radical change of leadership will create uncertainty and unexpected influence to organization. Hence， the radical change is also a kind of “risk”. when a company is in crisis.

conclusion

In conclusion， leadership plays a key role in management and creates unique and important influence in organization. Autocratic leadership style helps organization to achieve a goal through the high degree of controlling. Democratic leadership style helps organization to build a harmonious environment in workplace. Laissez Faire leadership style encourages leader to sacrifice their right and make follower control the organization by themselves. Okuda’s leadership style， a new style of leadership， is the combination of autocratic and democratic. A radical change in leadership helps organization through the crisis if the problems are attribute to leaders. But， a blind change will be a deadly decision if the root of crisis is uncertain.

Reference

Awan， MMahmood， K2010， ‘Relationship among leadership style， organizational culture and employee commitment in university libraries’. Library management， Vol.31， No.4/5， p.259.

Starrat， R.J2001， ‘Democratic leadership theory in late modernity: an oxymoron or ironic possibility’， International Journal of Leadership in Education， Vol.4， No.4， p.341.

Bittel， L， R1989， The McGraw-Hill 36-Hour Management Course， New York， NY.

Ulmer， R.R， Sellnow， T.L， and Seeger， M.W2007， Effective Crisis Communication: Moving from Crisis to Opportunity， Sage， Thousand Oaks， CA.

（責任編輯：韓曉兵）