Are the best leaders those who know themselves well and also recognize others? The psychodynamic approach was founded by Sigmund Freud (1938). It emphasized the influence of the unconscious mind on behavior. This strategy is “heavily influenced by clinical psychology and Freud’s original work” (PSU, L3, P1).
The responses to this approach are not conscious but appear deeply rooted to emotions. More specifically, the way we lead is said to be attributable to what we learn from family members while growing up. These learned behaviors are what make up one’s “personality types” and affect how we lead and respond toward our leaders (PSU, L3, P3). From the moment we are born, we are each being lead – we continue to be lead, one way or another, as adults.
The psychodynamic approach is said to have fallen out of favor in the modern study of leadership. This is attributable to most of the initial research being based on observation of people who were treated for severe mental difficulties in a clinical study. There was no research into the adult ego even though we now know that the adult ego is responsible for the mature and efficient ways of interacting with people. This was not a considerable factor during the research and can therefore lead to speculation.
The test that was used in conjunction with the psychodynamic approach, Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI), was unreliable since developers Katherine Cook Briggs and Isabel Briggs Myers were not professional test developers – this lead to invalidity and complicated results. Testing that was associated with this early research did not assess the subjects’ ego state – as such, no accurate standardization exists. “Each person is directed to try to identify her or his ego state from the description of them in literature or in workshops” (Northouse, 2013). This is very limiting in regards to accurately diagnosing a person’s psyche. This method was further limited in what it focused on – primarily on the leader which does not contribute to the other factors such as organizational hierarchies. If the method is limited to just the leader, there will certainly be room for errors.
For example, a team could easily disconnect from an ego driven leader who is more of a dictator that imposes rather than a collaborator who encourages followers to express their thoughts. This approach can decrease morale and force followers to second guess themselves – in fear of failing or being attacked by the leader. The followers can keep their heads down and be good workers who get it all done; it may, however, affect their performance or mental and emotional frame of mind. This type of leadership approach can cause retention and stress, among other feelings. Leaders who possess this trait are considered “warrior” archetypes because of how they “impose their will on to others.” (PSU, L3, P8)
It is a good thing that this approach is not favorable in today’s society. More positive outcomes can be realized from additional research in regards to people’s mental state. Supplementary research into the actual practice of this approach needs to continue to be explored. This methodology should lend itself to training in order for an individual to adjust their personality style. It is seemingly a good practice for leaders and followers to work together to gain a better understanding of their unique personalities; adapting to them can make for a more successful relationship.
The psychodynamic approach examines a person’s character (Northouse, 2013). It tells people the way things are as opposed to what they should (or we want them to) be. If leaders take the time to recognize who they are, who their followers are and, how it all came to be that way, they could be more efficient and effective in their approach.
Sources:
Web source:
http://www.personal.psu.edu/bfr3/blogs/leader/2013/05/psychodynamic-approach-to-…
MLA: “Psychodynamic Approach to Leadership in Work Settings …” Insert Name of Site in Italics. N.p., n.d. Web. 11 Sept. 2013
<http://www.personal.psu.edu/bfr3/blogs/leader/2013/05/psychodynamic-approach-to-
leadership-in-work-settings.html>.
http://s4.hubimg.com/u/6582711_f260.jpg
Northouse, P. G. (2013). Leadership: Theory and Practice Sixth Edition. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.
Pennsylvania State World Campus (2013). PSYCH 485 Lesson 3: Psychodynamic Approach. Retrieved on September 11, 2013 from
https://courses.worldcampus.psu.edu/fa13/psych485/001/content/03_lesson/printlesson.html
Hello Wanita,
I like the psychodynamic approach to assessing leadership and follower dynamics. The one bit I remember reading about in prior coursework and in this class as well, but neglected to comment on myself, in my blog, is the element of family origin and how that can influence and shape a leader or follower. I am a firm believer in a person’s early environments helping to shape them as individuals and in all relationships – personal and professional. We learn how to communicate (speak and listen) at first, within our family structure. We are either taught effective communication skills or not and this definitely carries through in our professional lives. No doubt about it, as far as I’m concerned. This approach is one I can really wrap my head around and prefer it as a theory, above all others. I think once a person understands who they are, what strengths and weaknesses they possess and how those traits effect those around them, it can be very beneficial. Great post and good luck in the class!