While some leadership theories and approaches look solely at the traits of a leader, the psychodynamic approach places emphasis on the relationship between leaders and their followers. This approach assesses which leaders personalities are best suited for certain follower personalities and it suggests that ideal scenarios are formed when both leaders and followers take a look at themselves to better understand their own behaviors, strengths and weaknesses (Northouse, 2013).
In preparation for our policy paper this semester, I have begun creating a mock scenario with me representing a consulting group who gets contracted to work for a company experiencing a decline in customer satisfaction, production and overall morale. I am planning on focusing on problem-solving after diagnosing the issue of poor communication based in poorly matched personality traits between the leader of the group and the members of the work group. A part of my process will be researching problem-solving techniques to help this company get back on the right track again. My first step will be to determine where the problems derived. I will use the trait approach to leadership as my main guide. Is it poor leadership? Is there a change in leadership that employees were just not responding too? Were there new members introduced into the existing teams, which could have added some new tensions? How did the group communicate as a whole? What kind of leadership traits did the leaders in place possess? These are just a handful of the many questions I will have to find answers for.
One of the most valuable tools I feel should be used to get started is the Standard Agenda; a tool that facilitates reflective thinking within a group in order to solve problems (Young, et al., 2001). This tool would be useful in determining (in mock form) where the problems derive. It could get people talking in a controlled environment with the focus being on getting to the bottom of the issues, so that all involved could move forward in a positive and productive fashion and get the company back on track.
I hope to determine (again, in mock form) that the issues are primarily based in ineffective leadership due to:
1) A leader who was to controlling and inflexible (autocratic leader type), which produced animosity and tension.
2) A leader who was too chummy with his followers and wasn’t in control of what was going on (Laissez-Faire leader type).
From there, I will use a personality assessment tool such as the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI). The MBTI measures the way people use their minds and helps both leaders and followers determine what their strengths and weaknesses are so that they can be better matched within their respective groups (Fruend, 1988).
The end result will be that I am able to make observations through the use of the standard agenda, make assessments through the use of the MBTI and make recommendations to the company on how to best use their leaders’ and team members’ strengths and weaknesses in order to achieve the company’s goals. Finally, I will be able to teach them how to effectively problem-solve on their own in the future.
References
Fruend, C., (1988). “Decision-Making Styles” JONA. Vol. 18, No. 12, pp. 5-11.
Northouse, P.G. (2013). Leadership: Theory and Practice (6th edition). Thousand Oaks, California: Sage Publication.
Young, K.S., Wood, J.T., Phillips, G.M., and Pedersen, D.J. (2001). Group Discussion: A Practical Guide to Participation and Leadership (3rd edition). Prospect Heights, Illinois: Waveland.