Analysis of Steve Jobs Leadership Style

Steve Jobs returned to apple after twelve years a revitalized leader having left the corporation in 1985 after an internal dispute. Thirteen years later apple has transformed through his leadership to the top computer company having surpassed Microsoft in year 2010. Much study has been directed to his leadership style in advent of the corporation’s success. Transformational leadership is what best fits Steve Jobs even though he has had numerous references as a charismatic leader. The transformational leadership style exhibited by Steve Jobs has four main attributes. The first and most recognizable is the charismatic or idealized sway possessed by the individual. This trait inspires others to emulate the behaviour and get on the passion possessed by the leader. Steve illustrates this in his ability to draw employee attention by the enthusiasm of his words and actions. Overtime he has exhibited the ability to come up with illustrations enhancing employee and customer comprehension of the products under development.

Steve is also known for great confidence and zero tolerance for mistakes from employees. At his best, he is autocratic since he rarely runs an open system but makes decisions personally or with small group of senior managers. This instils focus and seriousness in the goal and vision attainment that are clearly expressed by Jobs. This ability to inspire others to vision and mission attainment forms the second trait of the transformational leadership style. Steve is not known for his democratic nature but for insisting on holistic participation of every employee in the vision established. In fact, as a company apple prides itself in having the least number of products but with the highest net worth where in year 2010 the company had only 30 products but grossed thirty billion in worth. This is indicative of focus where Steve requires hundred percent focus on the established goals and ideas.

It is irrefutable the nature of intellectual understanding Steve Jobs has on Apple products both on the market and underdevelopment on customers. For instance, when explains about an IPod or an IDVD, he is able to place its usage in the daily life of the customer. He has mastered the art of connecting with customers where he translates the complex technological metrics with simple to comprehend illustrations. For instance, while launching the thirty-gigabyte IPod he exemplified its memory in terms of seven thousand five hundred songs or seventy-five hours of video. This is referred to marketing the benefit as opposed to marketing the product.

The kind of enthusiasm he portrays is able to compel Apple employees to inspired operations. He is known as firm and very demanding consequently using both force of actions and words to compel his employees to productivity.

Works Cited:

1. Blyton, P., & Turnbull, P. (2004). The dynamics of employee relations. Palgrave Macmillan.
2. Fossum, J. A., & Wallace, M. (Eds.). (2009). Trade union education: Transforming the world. Springer.
3. Gall, G., & Inglis, D. (Eds.). (2010). Trade unions in a neoliberal world: British trade unions under New Labour. Routledge.
4. Greenwood, M., & Wood, A. J. (1999). Trade unionism, the collective wage-bargaining nexus and productivity: Some international evidence. Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, 61(S1), 589-619.
5. International Labour Organization. (1998). ILO declaration on fundamental principles and rights at work. International Labour Office.
6. Kelly, J. (1998). Rethinking industrial relations: Mobilisation, collectivism and long waves. Routledge.
7. Pencavel, J. (2004). The surprising retreat of union Britain. Journal of Labor Economics, 22(2), 467-491.
8. Price, R. (2007). The politics of the right to strike: A comparative study in the United States and Canada. SUNY Press.
9. Trebilcock, M. J., & Cairns, R. B. (2004). Making sense of the Canada-US softwood lumber dispute. UBC Press.
10. Van Der Velden, R. K., & Wolbers, M. H. J. (1998). Collective bargaining and the gender wage gap: A comparative study. Journal of Labor Economics, 16(1), 141-165.