As a whole, the Psychodynamic Approach is extremely fascinating. Our text describes the Psychodynamic Approach as, “a constant pattern of ways of thinking, feeling, and acting with regard to the environment, including other people”. Though this approach is old and has fallen out of the modern study of leadership, I still feel as if it provides an easy realistic analysis to conduct and go by. Just because a lot of the theory is not concrete, I still agree with much of it, specifically in regards to social character and the shift of leadership. Coming from a baseball world, this idea of old-school/new-school approach, if you will, is all too relatable.
To give a quick overview: Currently still involved in the baseball world, leadership is a constant topic whether it is specifically being discussed or unconsciously being viewed. Being a current player in the minor leagues, you come across many different types of managers and players (leaders). Every team will have their set manager (head leader), and usually every team will have its captain (the players leader). From my experience, there are two types of managers in this world; you have your new school and your old school. Typically your old school managers have their set ways of doing things. They were all taught a certain way of going about your business many years ago and carry it over to modern society. Your new school guys typically have a more hands on approach; very involved with the players, asking questions, our point of view, etc. For instance, the best hitting advice that I have received thus far is this, “you are your best hitting coach…at this point it is evident that you can all hit or you wouldn’t be here, I can point out basic mechanical issues that you might have, but besides that, every player will have a certain secret that helps them and them only…something that can not simply be taught”; this is a new school approach. Whereas a typical old school approach would be there way or the high way.
When looking and thinking about this, it is hard not to relate it to social character and the shift in leadership perspectives. Social character was a term introduced by Erich Fromm and was described as “a kind of macro personality based on the emotional attitudes and values shared by people in a certain context (Northhouse, 328). In 2007 Maccoby took this idea and argued that there has been a shift in social character, it is no longer the industrial social character that it used to be, but rather has developed into a knowledge-based economy. The shift has been from a bureaucratic to an interactive social character, hence, old-school/new-school.
Our book states, “managers and leaders created missions, goals, schedules, and budgets; and assigned personnel.” This is exactly the concepts to which old school baseball managers go by. Our book goes on to state that now modern organizations deal with global markets, changes in technology, competition, etc. This is exactly how the new school manager goes about business. To explain further: old school managers come form an era where baseball was always played a certain way, certain time of year, and the players all came from the same place. New school managers come from an era where baseball is constantly progressing, it is played through all seasons, and most importantly, the importation of so many different players from all over the world (Cuba, Dominican Republic, Venezuela just to name a few). It never used to be this way.
Now I am not saying that one is better than the other. If approached in the right manner you can take good out of any situation and learn from it. The manager is still has the title of “Leader”, just as he did back in the day, there has just been a shift in leadership perspectives.
Nash Hutter
Northouse, P.G. (2013). Leadership: Theory and Practice. Los Angeles: Sage Publications.