Likert treats the organisation as a complex system based on the principle of supporting relationships, in which decision-making, leadership, motivation, communication and control move together. He was of the view that these variables are measurable and could be related to production and profit over time. He recognized the organisation as a social system made up of interrelated work groups having group loyalties. He was also of the view that traditional job oriented supervision was the cause of low productivity and low morale. He suggested participating management in the field of decision-making.
I tell you this to forewarn you, because I promise you that you will meet these people and you will find yourself in environments where what is rewarded above all is conformity. I tell you so you can decide to be a different kind of leader. And I tell you for one other reason. As I thought about these things and put all these pieces together—the kind of students I had, the kind of leadership they were being trained for, the kind of leaders I saw in my own institution—I realized that this is a national problem. We have a crisis of leadership in this country, in every institution. Not just in government. Look at what happened to American corporations in recent decades, as all the old dinosaurs like General Motors or TWA or . Steel fell apart. Look at what happened to Wall Street in just the last couple of years.
They are focused on achieving deadlines rather than how their employee is feeling about the work. Directive leaders are also more likely to control their employees by supervising every aspect of their employee’s duties. A directive leader is happy when the tasks are completed by their deadlines. The flaws with this type of leadership are that the leader may be too focused on policies and procedures rather than on what their employees need. These leaders will not have a secure relationship with their employees as they do not take the time to build morale or a relationship with them.