Authentic Leadership in Action

Imagine on the first day of the semester receiving the syllabus for a sociology course called Social Problems, whereby the instructor outlines all the assignments and due dates in order to help students keep current in the class.  At the next class meeting, the following week, only half of the students have completed the weekly assignment that is to be turned in at the end of class.  Unfortunately, the other half of the class provided various reasons as to why they were incapable of completing the assignment.  For instance, some students stated that the assignment was too vague and that they did not understand the instructions; others indicated that they did not have enough time, while a few admitted to not even making an attempt.  Due to the instructor being new to the college, wanting to make a positive impression and be well accepted along with trying to accommodate students’ needs as much as possible, she decided to make changes to the assignment.  In fact, she extended the dead line, made the length of the paper shorter, and provided in-depth instructions as to precisely what she expected from students.  Furthermore, she encouraged all the students to email her throughout the week, as she would be happy to answer any questions or concerns regarding the class with the hope of developing an atmosphere conducive for learning.

 

On the third week of class, a similar scenario took place whereby just half of the students had completed their homework, while others gave an assortment of reasons and/or excuses for not doing theirs.  Again, the instructor changed the assignment, this time frustrating the students that had done the assignment timely, as they would have to change their work to meet the new requirements.  This pattern of behaviors continued over the course of six weeks, until a student approached the instructor explaining the frustration that he felt with the class, as there was a lack of consistency and accountability.  Upon hearing from other students that had completed their assignments on time, the instructor decided to restructure the course so that consistency, accountability, and flexibility would all be available.  As a matter of fact, the instructor reorganized the class by providing more detailed instructions on how to complete assignments, placed a larger emphasis on students’ responsibility for completing assignments promptly or contacting the instructor if issues arose that necessitated more time, thereby creating an equitable learning environment for all.  Moreover, the instructor made herself readily available via email, as she responded within 24 hours of receiving a message and was always sincere in her responses that allowed her to establish genuine relationships with her students.  In the end, students that came to class prepared were free from worry that they would have to redo their assignments, while students that had not done their work could not receive an extension unless they provided a legitimate reason (i.e. medical or family emergency).

 

From that point on, the class went quite smoothly with the vast majority of students enjoying and respecting the instructor’s class policies and teaching methods.  In my opinion, the instructor developed an authentic style of leadership in that she exhibited “a pattern of leader behavior that draws upon and promotes both positive psychological capacities, and a positive ethical climate, to foster greater self-awareness, an internalized moral perspective, balanced processing of information, and relational transparency on the part of the leader working with followers, fostering positive self-development” (Walumbwa et al., 2008, p. 94; as cited in Northouse, 2013, p. 262).  To begin, the instructor engaged in balanced processing whereby she used her “ability to analyze information objectively and explore other people’s opinion before making a decision” (Northouse, 2012, p. 264).  This happened after she heard from both groups of students in the class (i.e. students that completed their work on time and those that did not) and instituted a restructuring of the course.  Next, relational transparency was witnessed by communicating openly and honestly with students concerning expectations and rules of the course.  Self-awareness followed as the instructor began to understand where her strengths and weakness were along with the impact she was exerting on her students.  For instance, the instructor’s strength was her high level of commitment in helping her students learn, while her weakness was attempting to accommodate all her students as it detracted from the stability and accountability of the class.  As the instructor came to know herself better, she gained a clearer sense of who she was and what she stood for allowing her to be resolute in her decisions and actions (Northouse, 2013).  Finally, internalized moral perspective was achieved in that the instructor used her “internal moral standards and values to guide [her] behavior rather than allow outside pressures to control them (e.g. group or societal pressure)” (Northouse, 2013, p. 264).  Thus, the instructor stopped allowing the outside pressure from her students to dictate her actions instead using her own “expressed beliefs and morals” to influence her decisions (Northouse, 2013, p. 264).  Hence, these four factors were utilized in achieving an authentic leadership style.

 

As for the four positive psychological attributes associated with authentic leadership, the instructor evidenced these qualities as well.  First, the instructor was resilient as she was able to “recover from and adjust to [the] adverse situation” that occurred within the class (Northouse, 2013, p. 265).  Secondly, optimism radiated from the instructor as she took a positive stance on the situation along with having favorable expectations for the future.  Third, hope was displayed through the use of goal planning with the changing of the class rules.  Fourth, confidence was seen in the instructor as she held a strong belief in her ability to motivate her students to learn and achieve a solid understanding of social problems.  When it came to the factor of moral reasoning, the instructor definitely held the “capacity to make ethical decisions about issues of right and wrong and good or bad…[in that she was able to] transcend individual differences and align individuals toward a common goal” (Northouse, 2013, p. 265).  Of course, this is supported by how after the instructor asserted herself as a leader in the classroom, majority of the students were onboard with her methods and adhered to the rules.  Still, another factor that influences authentic leadership is critical life events.  While not evident from the above description of the instructor, it was later learned that the reason for the instructor’s dedication and commitment towards accommodating students stemmed from her own experience as a student in which many of her professors provided very little social interaction, making the learning experience less than optimal.  Therefore, the instructor was trying to correct what she perceived as a deficiency (i.e. lack of instructor interaction) and temporarily became too compliant, which thankfully was resolved rather quickly.  Although, the class had a shaky beginning, in the end, the instructor become an authentic leader* capable of instilling trust while serving the common good of her students. 

 

References

 

George, B. (2006, October 22). Truly authentic leadership. U.S. News & World Report. Retrieved from http://www.usnews.com/usnews/news/articles/061022/30authentic.htm*link

 

Image Source:  Retrieved from http://growyourleaders.com/workshopDetails.asp?catID=11&category=Leadership

 

Northouse, P. G. (2013). Leadership: Theory and practice (6^th ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Sage.