As we work through the lessons learning about leadership in the workplace, it feels almost impossible not to compare the lessons to daily life in the office. I work as a CPC, a medical coder for the physician practices at our hospital clinics here in southeastern Idaho. So, there’s some pressure to get it right. I love my job; but, as is the norm in the healthcare field, there is change. Most recently, movement to a new Vice President of Medical Practices to a new position, and we all loved the current one, as well as a transition to a new EMR (Electronic Medical Record) system, which is a nightmare. As a group of employees, we are tired.
At one of our last all staff meetings we listened to a motivational speaker; her name was Maureen, but she calls herself MGM. She started out the session by saying to all of us, “We all hate change don’t we?” and the group of 200 or so nodded in agreement, and some even cheered. Then she continued by saying, “But, doesn’t every good thing in our life require change? Getting married, having children, getting a promotion, or a raise, it all requires that something else changes,” and again, the group nodded. “So, why do we say that we hate change!?” she exclaimed. And along with my own, I saw the eyebrows of the massive group collectively raise. She was a fantastic leader, brought in to motivate and rejuvenate the tired mass of individuals that we had become while we were facing changes in our hospital that seemed daunting.
We learned in lesson 2 about the Trait Approach to leadership, and MGM fits each of the traits explained in our textbook, Leadership: Theory and Practice by Peter Northouse, to a T. Our book lists the following as important traits that a leader possesses: Intelligence, Self-Confidence, Determination, Integrity, and Sociability. (Northouse, 2016, pg 23-28) Now, my short little exchange doesn’t let you in to each of the reasons why this person fits the criteria, but here’s just a short analysis. As far as the intelligence factor, she completely outwitted us with her statement regarding change. There are literally motivational signs littering the home stores talking about change, and it’s mostly all in a negative light. But in a matter of seconds she was able to convince us that she knew otherwise, and not we did too. She was obviously self-confident, enough to stand up in front of this massive group of cynical, overworked, and tired healthcare professionals. She was highly sociable, and in fact gave numerous random people entering the conference room hugs. (I thanked my lucky stars it wasn’t me that was one of those lucky few, because as much as I like to think I am leadership material I certainly don’t adore physical contact from strangers, even when they smiled broadly and laughed naturally like she did)
My boss is highly educated, has tons of experience and knows her job well, but is a bit apathetic and struggles with communication. I know this of her, my co-workers know this of her, and now so do you. It’s the sociable aspect that she lacks; following the trait approach, she just doesn’t fit perfectly. But, she is direct, honest, loyal, and provides a stable workplace environment. If you’re not fulfilling the expectations she has of you, she will tell you. She will overlook all of the things you do right though, so there’s the give and take of her leadership. Over the last 5 years of working for her, I have learned that she is actually a good leader.
According to Northouse, there is a five factor personality model that is used within the trait approach which includes: Neuroticism, being depressed or anxious, vulnerable or worried, Extraversion, being sociable and positive, Openness, being informed and curious or “open”, Agreeableness, or being nurturing and accepting of others, and conscientiousness, or being organized/thorough and dependable. (Northouse, 2016, pg 27) I can’t apply these to MGM in my short time knowing her, but in using these 5 personality factors, my boss actually seems to hold about a 50% “have/does not have” rate. She is extraverted and conscientious in the aspect that she is very dependable. She is not very nurturing or comforting, and she tends to be a nit neurotic on the side of anxiousness when it comes to deadlines and push back from administration.
One thing to add to this analysis is that, just like Northouse discusses, the trait approach has some downfalls. The trait approach, while working well to identify good potential leaders, does not guarantee good outcomes or group performance. (Northouse, 2016, pg 41). Would MGM be a good leader back at our offices? I’m not sure of that. I actually think my calmer, quieter, take charge actual boss does a better job that she do of leading our group in the finance and coding world. But the approach is still highly useful in my opinion. The approach that, in my mind, would fit well for my own boss is the situational approach, where different situations require different leaders. (PSU WC, 2018, L. 1) In our situation, an office where individuals work primarily independently toward monetary goals, but also interact with physicians and other management, my own leader does a fantastic job. We are not a loud office, or one where people are constantly talking or interacting, so the traits of my particular leader may be just what our situation needs.
Something I have learned thus far in this course is that sometimes I was not a great follower. Reading through the section on components of the leadership process in Northouse, the idea that the members of the group need to have a “common purpose” really made me think. (Northouse, 2016, pg 6) Did I always have a common purpose as my boss? If not, whose fault was that really? According to Northouse, “The trait approach is also used for personal awareness and development.” (Northouse, 2016, pg 29). I tend to emerge as a leader in my coding peers. So it holds that if I am going to apply this approach to my own boss, I can apply this to myself. If I expect her to comply with “having it all”, am I being a good group member to help us all reach our end goal? Not always, but I am now. And learning the components of leadership in this approach I have been able to be an even better team member (follower) for my leader.
It is so interesting to take an in depth look at how each of these moving parts and components of the process of leadership work together to help a leader themselves succeed or fail, and the group as a whole. I look forward to learning about each of the other approaches and applying them to situations in life and in studies.
Resources:
- Northouse, Peter. G. (2016). Leadership: Theory and practice. Sage publications. 7th Edition.
- Pennsylvania State University World Campus (2019). PSYCH 485 Lesson 1: Looking at Leadership through Many Lenses. Retrieved from https: https://psu.instructure.com/courses/1972967/modules/items/25704818
sna5223 says
Lauren,
Your post really interested me because you implemented both the trait approach and the situational approach in describing two leaders in your workplace. I agree in that it is interesting to take into consideration these different approaches we learn in class and apply them to our real world experiences; this really shows just how these approaches work and either make or break a leader. In your post you compare your new VP that your coding department took on, to the motivational leader that came in to talk to your group (MGM). Applying the situational approach to both of these leaders sparked my interest and I want to dive deeper into this approach and really look into not only their leadership style in the situation, but also the development level of the followers.
Jumping a little ahead in the Northouse text, we see that the situational approach focuses on ones leadership in situations and how in order to be an effective leader; one must adapt his or her style to the demands of the situation (Northouse, 2016, p. 93). This approach classifies leaders either into the directive group or the supportive group. “Directive behaviors help group members accomplish goals by giving directions, establishing goals and methods of evaluation, setting timelines, defining roles, and showing how the goals are to be achieved” (Northouse, 2016, p. 93). You mention that your new boss lacks good communication and is apathetic, but on the other hand you mention that she is direct and provides a stable workplace. It is clear that your current boss fits into this category because of how she is direct and focuses her communication on the end goal. On the opposite end, we have leaders who have supportive tendencies. These leaders are good at listening, praise their followers for good work, help the group feel comfortable, and have great two-way communication (Northouse, 2016, p.93). Being that these types of leaders tend to be more sociable in their leadership, we can easily classify MGM into this category. Her ability to motivate, rejuvenate, and communicate with the room proves that she focuses more on being supportive rather than directive.
The SLII model shows how directive and supportive leadership behaviors combine, breaking down leadership styles four different ways; S1, S2, S3, and S4 (Northouse, 2016, p. 95). Based on the information you provided I think we can easily classify your new boss into the first style (S1). This style has high directive qualities and low supportive qualities. This type of leaders focuses communication on goal achievement only and spends a short amount of time using supportive behaviors. They also give direct instructions and supervise closely (Northouse, 2016, p. 93). Being that she lacks the sociability that MGM had and seems to focus more on the goal at hand I think that she fits perfectly within S1. Being that your coding group seemed to have benefited from MGM’s uplifting supportive ways, I think that your boss could potentially be more effective as a leader if she were to implement some of these qualities into their leadership. The situational approach focuses on the leaders behaviors in a situation. Being that you guys seemed to be stressed about the new EMR system, I think that this is a time in which your boss needs to adjust their behavioral style and be more personable with you all and communicate with you to ensure that transition over to this new software is smooth and effortless.
We can also categorize followers based on their development level using the SLII model. Development level “is the degree to which followers have the competence and commitment necessary to accomplish a given goal or activity” (Northouse, 2016, p. 96). If followers have a positive attitude about reaching an end goal, and have mastered the goals to achieve that goal, then they are at a high development level. There are also four categories followers can be classified into; D1, D2, D3, and D4 (Northouse, 2016, p. 96). Although I do not know much about your coding group based on the information, it seems to me that as a follower you could be classified into the D1 group. These followers are low in competence and high in commitment, meaning that you are new to something and leery on how to do it, yet excited about the challenge (Northouse, 2016, p.96). You mention that getting that new software was a nightmare and that you were unsure of your new boss and were not sure if you had the same common purpose, but yet you remained optimistic and committed.
I think it is crucial for leaders to not only take into account their own leadership style’s in their current situations, but also take into account the development level of their followers at the same time. I think that taking into account both of these make them out to be a very effective leader. There are two tasks leaders must face in order to adapt their leadership style to the current situation; first, they must determine the nature of the situation, and second, they must adapt their style (Norhtouse, 2016, p. 97). For your boss, I think that they need to first ask questions such as: what is the end goal? Are my followers on the same page of this end goal? Do my leaders have the skills to accomplish these goals? I think if your boss would have asked herself these questions, she would have realized that your coding group was leery of the new software and were struggling with it. Answering those, she then could have adapted her leadership style to be more supportive of the coders. Being there for them, communicating with them, and motivating them seems to be exactly what your office needed, just like MGM provided you.
Works Cited
Northouse, P. (2016). Leadership: Theory and Practice. Thousand Oaks, California: SAGE Publications, Inc.