A unified leadership theory is basically the development of consciousness that is basic support for the complexity and behaviors and psychological qualities linked with leadership (Davies, et al., 2011). The firs strategy I will use in integrating the two theories is developing mutual respect between the leaders and the followers. This will increase the efficiency and effectiveness in the workplace as the subordinates will develop a great sense of commitment and loyalty to the leader. This new found affiliation will eliminate any negative blood between the subordinates who would feel as the Out-group in the organization (Dunston, 2016). In this integrated system the subordinates would be rewarded with letters of recommendation for their good work and even with performance related bonuses.
The next strategy is developing a framework of communication whereby all the actors in the organization would feel like equals at the different departments (Nahavandi, 2016). Subordinates would be provided with information at the same time without any discrimination of In-Group and Out-Group. This will foster a great working condition as there would be a wave of positive energy as fairness and equality would be felt. Any punishment or reward at every level of hierarchy should be equal among the members of that level without any favor. I will eliminate assigning of one subordinate to relaying information to their fellows as the leaders would be in charge of that. Going up the chain, the executives would be in charge of relaying information to the leaders. This will increase efficiency and effectiveness.
The other strategy that would be used is coming up with a centralized motivation for the workers (Sin, et al., 2009). Every subordinate would be encouraged in equal measure and there will be no divided attention between them. Each and every subordinate would be entitled to any work assigned. Tasks that are deemed challenging and interesting would be assigned on a rotational basis among the subordinate. This would ensure that there is no bad blood among each other in turn increasing the efficiency at the organization.
In public health scenario, decision making is very important to address challenges that would pose special threats at the work place (Wilson, et al., 2010). The unified theory would reinforce the role of nurse managers in improving and also empowering the work environment that promotes transfer of information in practice to provide evidence-based care (Wilson, et al., 2010). Nurses would always be assigned roles by the manager and this would increase efficiency as there would be a central point of command and they would be all be answerable to the command. All that would matter is their qualification and level of competence.
There would be defined code of conduct between the doctors and the nurses and this will breed mutual respect between them. Since breakdown of relationship between these two can have a catastrophic effect, it would be prudent that they both should have an integrated chain of command that they both would be answerable to. this will increase the job performance of both groups as there will be no supremacy battles as there will be a centralized chain of command that would make them see each other as equals. Motivation and encouragement would always be provided on an equality basis in the public health scenario. When everyone feels that’s they matter in the workplace then there will be efficiency and effectiveness at the workplace. Everyone would be aware they are a piece that completes a main puzzle.
Davies, A., Wong, C. A., & Laschinger, H. (2011). Nurses’ participation in personal knowledge transfer: the role of leader–member exchange (LMX) and structural empowerment. Journal of Nursing Management, 19(5), 632-643.
Dunston, R. (2016). Globalization, mobile technology, and social media’s influence on leadership communication involving millennials.
Nahavandi, A. (2016). Threshold concepts and culture-as-meta-context. Journal of Management Education, 40(6), 794-816.
Sin, H. P., Nahrgang, J. D., & Morgeson, F. P. (2009). Understanding why they don’t see eye to eye: An examination of leader–member exchange (LMX) agreement. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94(4), 1048.
Wilson, K. S., Sin, H. P., & Conlon, D. E. (2010). What about the leader in leader-member exchange? The impact of resource exchanges and substitutability on the leader. Academy of Management Review, 35(3), 358-372.