As I’ve discussed in previous post, I was a server/bartender for over 10 years. In these 10 years, I had the opportunity to work at many different restaurants and experience many different leadership/management styles. But it always came down to comparing my managers in three different ways, that now that I have learned it, seemed similar to the skills approach. The skills approach deals with behaviors and traits, and how they are related to one another as well as how they define a leader (Northouse, 2016).
A trait can be defined as a characteristic that is identifiable to an individual. It is what we were born with. It’s part of our personality. A behavior on the other hand, is the way an individual acts and the way their actions affect others (Northouse, 2016). A trait can be something that occurs naturally, where as a behavior can be put on a front (For example, acting professional around a boss, but silly with friends) or being natural. Traits and behaviors are important in the skills approach because the skills approach focuses largely on the behaviors and skills that can be learned and developed as an individual goes through life. This approach also focuses on how an individual’s trait can be changed to become a better and more effective leader (Northouse, 2016).
When it comes to the skills approach, there are three skill types that come to mind when discussing this approach. The first is the technical skill. Technical skill is knowledge that an individual may possess in a specific type of work or activity (Northouse, 2016). Secondly, there is human skill. Human skill is the knowledge one possess to be able to work with people, otherwise known as “people skills” (Katz, 1955). The third skill is the conceptual skill. This is the skill that works with ideas and how an individual can put those ideas to life (Northouse, 2016).
Now as I stated previously, I have had the opportunity to work with many different mangers, however they all had one major thing in common-they were great leaders. I believe that they were great leaders because they possessed the technical skills that allowed them to be great. They were excellent at serving; they knew how be efficient, clear tables well, and manage multiple tables at the same time. Since they knew the technicalities of being a great server they were able to lead the not as experienced servers and teach them how to be fabulous. Secondly, the managers possessed the people skills, extremely well. When a server messed up, the managers immediately stepped in to fix it; wowing the guests with their words and free food. They knew exactly what the guest would need to be happy, without the guest even having to say a word. This skill lead the mangers to be great leaders to the other servers, showing them how to ensure their guests happiness . Lastly, the managers were excellent at the conceptual skills. They always had to come up with new dishes or drinks to keep the restaurant fresh and new. They had to work with the chef to come up with ideas to keep up with the competition of other restaurants. They discussed their ideas and brought them to life. This is what made them great leaders.
Something notable about the skills approach, is that even though it is pretty good at discussing behavior and traits, it cannot predict the success or the failure of a leader (Northouse, 2016). This is important to note because in my example above of the managers I’ve worked with, many have come up with ideas that do not work. They conceptualize the ideas, however they still fail. Or, a manager failed to make a guest happy, even if they used all their people skills on “full force”, the guest may still be miserable. Sometimes, no matter what behavior good or bad you exhibit, you will fail. But, that is ok. Failing is a part of becoming a good leader (Northouse, 2016).
References:
Katz, R.L. (1955). Skills of an effective administrator. Harvard Business Review, 33(1), 33-42.
Northouse, P. G. (2016). Leadership: Theory and Practice. Los Angeles: Sage Publications.
Lance Weyeneth says
Jessica,
What I had learned from your blog is there is that there are definitely a lot of aspects that go into being a manager especially a restaurant manager. I have watched several programs that many owners have no experience in the food, or beverage services, but yet have put themselves in a position of power to control how the business is run. In these programs the evaluator often noticed that the manager or owner lacked various skills that one should have in that type of business. As for yourself, you seem to recognize that it takes certain attributes to be a successful leader while running a bar or restaurant. You were clearly able to connect the ideas from the lesson materials and how it relates to the various leadership situations that you have been in. As you best explained that a positive skill to acquire would be having high people skills and this is the main reason I agree with your blog that sometimes as a leader then you have to understand what abilities you possess. It seems like that you weren’t just born for this role and it required experiences and influences for you to find skills that shaped your behaviors.
The impact of the competencies that you have gained showed a positive leadership outcome as you have influenced a group of followers to work for you harder and this style will probably translate to their behaviors so that one day when they come a leader then they will showcase the same abilities you taught them. Using the skill approach then you are able to clearly map how to reach an effectiveness in your organization (Northouse, 2016).You were able to successfully use the skills approach in this scenario you presented. Great post!
Reference:
Northouse, Peter. (2016). Leadership: Theory and Practice. Los Angeles: Sage Publications.
Anthony Kent Springmann says
Hello Jessica,
This is an interesting post because you presented an idea that I think is ofter overlooked, or at least rarely mentioned, in most fields; failure. I think that failure is a crucial step in the learning process because it allows us the opportunity to re-examine our mistakes and correct them going forward.
Based off of the evidence that you have provided, do you think that failure falls more within the skills approach or trait approach?
I think that an argument can go either way. Failure can directly affect the psyche of an individual, which can lead to second-guessing or losing the confidence and extraversion that is required of a leader (Northouse, 2016). This would be an impact on the trait approach because there is a loss of confidence and self-belief. If an individual fails and responds negatively to the failure, this could directly impact the individual attribute of motivation (Williams, 2018). Moreover, if there is a repeated failure, this could lead to a loss in desire to lead.
With that being said, I think that you raise a great point in your post. Failure, and more importantly responding to failure, is crucial for adaptation and success. I think that this idea is often overlooked, especially in regards toward leadership.
Thanks for the great post!
-Tony
References:
Northouse, P. G. (2016). Leadership: Theory and Practice. Los Angeles: Sage Publications.
Williams, Jason.(2018). Pennsylvania State University: Lesson 4: Skills Approach.