Leadership

PSYCH 485 blog

Five Characteristics of Authentic Leadership

by

Bill George’s Authentic Leadership Model

Authentic leaders are seen as genuine, or “real.” Authentic leadership is still forming as a theory, but more research has been done the past few decades due to people’s insecurity in leadership and their desire to have leaders who are honest and “good” (Northouse, 2016). My current supervisor, Beth, whom I just started under a month ago, is a great example of an authentic leader according to Bill George’s practical approach to authentic leadership.

George’s model focuses on the different qualities an authentic leader has (or can develop). If a leader demonstrates these qualities or characteristics, they will be a more authentic leader and their followers will respond positively and the organization will benefit. There are five dimensions described by George, and each are associated with an observable characteristic: purpose and passion, values and behavior, relationships and connectedness, self-discipline and consistency, and heart and compassion (Penn State, 2017). Beth displays all of these.

Authentic leaders have a sense of purpose, knowing what they are about and where they are headed (Northouse, 2017). Purpose manifests itself as passion. Passionate people are interested in what they are doing, are inspired and intrinsically motivated, and care about the work they are doing (Northouse, 2017). About a month ago, the work at the office was restructured. A new unit was created for a specific part of our job. I was placed in that unit under Beth who was selected to lead. Beth demonstrates passion for this new job, as she shows she cares about figuring out the best way to accomplish the work, and spends a lot of time running reports and brainstorming ways to help the new unit succeed.

Secondly, authentic leaders have values, know what they are, and don’t compromise on those values (Northouse, 2017). This quality manifests itself through the leader’s behavior, authentic leaders acting in accordance with their values. Beth clearly values that work is does according to policy and in the best interest of our clients. She does not let people take shortcuts if they are against policy, and will not compromise the rules. I see her as a better leader because of this, compared to other supervisors I have dealt with that do not follow policy at all times.

Thirdly, authentic leaders build relationships with others and have connectedness with their followers. They are willing to share their experiences and listen to others’ experiences, and are communicative with their followers (Northouse, 2017). Beth does this often, she talks to us about her work and personal life sometimes, and listens when we talk about our lives as well. She is open about what changes are occurring, the thought process behind them, and demonstrates respect of all of us. Because she connects with us, we respect her in return, understand what is going on, and are more committed to her goals and ideas.

The fourth dimension of authentic leadership is self-discipline, which gives leaders focus and determination: ability to focus on a goal, and move forward towards that goal even in the face of setbacks (Northouse, 2017). This is consistency. Self-disciplined leaders remain cool, calm, and consistent during stressful situations (Northouse, 2017). Beth has demonstrated this a lot in the past month. Implementing our new process has come with a lot of confusion, stress, and situations coming to light that need adjustments. Beth has consistently kept her cool and kept all of us on track. She stays focused, adjusts what needs changed, keeps us in the loop, and moves forward.

Finally, authentic leaders have heart, which shows in their compassion. They are sensitive to others’ needs and are willing to help them (Northouse, 2017). Beth has done this by noticing when we are stressed about the process (it has caused our workloads to increase dramatically and deadlines to shorten immensely). She checks in with us as a group and individually to see how we are dealing with everything, and what she can do to relieve the stress. She seems like she is genuinely concerned about her followers’ well-being and wants to alleviate as much as she can.

Overall, all of these qualities of Beth are what make her an authentic leader. Her passion, behaviors, ability to connect, consistency, and compassion are all inspiring. It is clear through these actions that she cares about her job, the work, how to accomplish it, and how to keep her followers happy, productive, and focused. We know that no matter how stressful or complicated this new process is, Beth has our back, wants to find the best approach to get the work done, and will help us genuinely. I wish more leaders would display this level of authenticity.

References:

Northouse, Peter G. (2016). Leadership: Theory and Practice (7th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, Inc.

Pennsylvania State University. (2017). Lesson 12: Authentic Leadership. In PSYCH485: Leadership in Work Settings: Spring 2017. Retrieved from: http://psu.instructure.com.

Save

Tarah Toohil and Servant Leadership

by

Servant Leadership is a leadership theory based on the concept that leaders should be attentive to their followers’ needs and concerns, and should help nurture and empower them to reach their full potential (Northouse, 2016). By doing so, followers will go beyond what is expected of them, be more fully developed, and positively impact the organization. They will also be more likely to practice servant leadership themselves. All of this not only positively impacts the organization, but trickles out to have a positive effect on the community as well. A servant leader is someone who wants to lead not just for the sake of being “in charge” or having power, but genuinely wants to have a positive impact on others and better serve their community. One of the last people someone might think of when thinking about is a politician, but one of the first people that came to my mind is Pennsylvania State Representative Tarah Toohil.

While Toohil is not my residential district’s state representative, she is the representative in the city that I work in, and I have learned positive things about her over the past few years that make me associate her with a servant leader. One of the most impressive things she has done is help co-found a non-profit agency called Brandon’s Forever Home. Named after her foster brother who passed in a tragic accident, the home serves as a resource hub for foster families and foster children. They routinely work with foster children, making sure they have clothes, personal items, Christmas presents, and a bag of their own so that they don’t have to transport their belongings in garbage bags. They provide a safe place for foster children to come and socialize, providing craft sessions and cooking classes, among other help, all volunteer driven. They just launched a mentoring program also. They also work with people interested in fostering and adoption, and help to recruit and educate families. Both Toohil and co-founder Lorine Ogurkis are attorneys, and the organization provides legal services for people adopting through the foster care system (Brandon’s). According to Kalinowski, Toohil’s life work has been driven by the desire to help change and have a positive impact on the foster care system. She does this not only through the organization, but through her efforts as a state representative, serving on the Children and Youth legislative committee. This desire to have a positive impact is one of the hallmarks of the beginning of a servant leader.

Servant leaders listen to others, have empathy for others, care about their well-being, and help them overcome personal problems (Northouse, 2016). There is no doubt that Toohil does all of these things, not only through her non-profit, but in her every day work. Sometimes our clients (I work in the County Assistance Office, an entity of the Department of Human Services), go to Toohil’s office if they are having issues with their application or benefits in general. Toohil’s office listens to their problem, and seems to genuinely care, as they jump into action immediately, contacting us to get more details and rectify the situation if they can. Toohil also was the reason that Lorine Ogurkis and her husband got involved in the foster system. She convinced them to consider it after fertility issues, and they became passionate about the cause, adopting two children and becoming co-founders of Brandon’s Forever Home, and instrumental in the cause (Brandon’s).

Servant leaders are able to conceptualize – have a vision for an organization and provide a clear sense of goals and direction, being able to see the big picture (Northouse, 2016). The growth and development of Brandon’s Forever Home is a testament to this. Servant leaders also foster the development of community (Northouse, 2016). Brandon’s Forever Home continues to involve various community members, foster children, and former foster children, all whom feel connected and a drive to serve this purpose greater than themselves. Servant leaders also empower others, and creative value for their communities (Northouse, 2016). By providing this space and these services to assist foster children and help them be more at peace, find loving homes, and feel “normal,” even just for a few hours per week, Toohil and Ogurkis are empowering both the foster children and foster/adoptive families, and creating a positive, long-lasting impact on their local community. It is clear that while Tarah Toohil may be a politician, she is foremost a servant leader, determined to have a positive impact on others she works with and her community in general.

Brandon’s Forever Home. About Us. Retrieved from http://www.brandonsforeverhome.com/aboutus.

Kalinowski, Bob. (2016, Feb 21). Legacy of Love. The Citizen’s Voice. Retrieved from http://citizensvoice.com/news/legacy-of-love-1.2009807.

Northouse, Peter G. (2016). Leadership: Theory and Practice (7th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, Inc.

Jim Jones: Pseudotransformational Leader

by

While learning about charismatic leaders and the Transformational leadership process, I kept thinking about cult leaders. Charisma, as defined by Weber, is a special personality characteristic that essentially gives someone special powers. It is reserved for few people, and results in the person being treated as a leader (Northouse, 2016, p. 164). House defined some more specific characteristics of a charismatic leader: they are dominant, self-confident, and have a desire to influence (Northouse, 2016, p. 164). He also describes their behaviors – such as being strong role models for the beliefs they want followers to adopt, are able to articulate their goals, communicate high expectations and confidence in their followers. (Northouse, 2016, p. 164). These characteristics and behaviors lead followers to trust their leader, develop similar beliefs as their leader, become obedient to their leader, feel an emotional involvement in the leader’s goals, and even have an “unquestioning acceptance” of their leader (Northouse, 2016, p. 165). If there was ever a phrase to conjure up thoughts about cults, “unquestioning acceptance” is it.

The theories of Transformational leadership are similar to charismatic leadership. Transformational leadership, in particular Bass’s model, describes various factors of a transformational leader, charisma being one of them, although coined in this model as “idealized influence” (Northouse, 2016, p. 168). Also included is inspirational motivation: leaders who motivate their followers to achieve more and use symbols and emotional appeals to do so, intellectual stimulation, and individualized consideration: providing support and addressing needs (Northouse, 2016). Transformational leaders use these four factors to motivate their followers to rise above their own self-interest for the sake of the organization and reach their full potential.

When Teri Buford O’Shea recalls her early days in Jim Jones’s Peoples Temple church, she describes many characteristics of him that could be describing a charismatic and transformational leader. He was dubbed a visionary, building a new community where people did not have to worry about food or housing (Gritz 2011). He was very involved in civil rights, and seemed to be doing a lot of good in the world, adopting children and helping with community development. He donated to charity, built schools, ran social and medical programs, and preached social equality for everyone (History.com). His charisma attracted many to his movement, estimates indicates there were around 20,000 members at one point (History.com). As O’Shea put it:

“If you wanted religion, Jim Jones could give it to you. If you wanted socialism, he could give it to you. If you    were looking for a father figure, he’d be your father. He always homed in on what you needed and managed to bring you in emotionally.”  (Gritz 2011).

He eventually established a community in Guyana, Africa, dubbed Jonestown, for his followers, and around 1000 of them moved with him there in the mid-1970s. He led them to believe this would be a safe, utopian community where everyone would be equal, loved, and happy. Unfortunately, this was not the case. Jones began to unravel. O’Shea described it as “paranoia” (Gritz 2011). Essentially Jones seemed to become consumed with the fear that people would leave Jonestown, and that the government and media were out to destroy him and his cause.

Jonestown residents had to work long, hard days building up Jim Jones’s vision, and were punished if they dissented, threatened if they expressed any desire to leave. He also told his followers that they were in danger of being attacked, and had them practice mass suicide drills in case of that happening (Gritz 2011).

In 1978, Leo Ryan, a U.S. representative from California along with some reporters and family of Peoples Temple followers, traveled to Guyana to investigate concerns of the treatment of members (History.com). When the group went to leave, they were ambushed with gunfire by some of Jones’s followers. Ryan and a few others died. In the meantime, Jones gathered his followers. This time was no drill. He told them that they were in danger, and instructed them to commit a “revolutionary act” and commit suicide (History.com). Drinking juice laced with cyanide and sedatives in the midst armed gunmen, over 900 people died that day, a third of them children (History.com). Until the September 11th terrorist attacks, it was the single most loss of U.S. civilian life in a non-natural disaster (History.com). Luckily for Teri Buford O’Shea, she was able to leave before this happened, picking up on the impending danger, and managed to convince Jones she should return to the United States to assist with his legal affairs (Gritz 2011).

So how does this happen? The people who followed Jim Jones didn’t see any warning signs at first that they were in danger. They were essentially blinded by Jones’s charismatic traits and seemingly lofty goals of equality and his idealistic vision for the future. Jones was such a powerful leader, he actually convinced hundreds of people to leave their homes and to create a new settlement to fit his vision on an entirely different continent! They were so committed to his goals and vision, they fed their children poison and laid down beside them to die for it. His followers were clearly influenced to transcend their own self-interests for the vision of their leader, and many of them clearly possessed an “unquestioning acceptance” of Jones. That sounds like charismatic or transformational leadership to me. But then there’s that caveat – transformational leadership is a process that involves creating a connection with followers that raises both their motivation levels, and their morality levels while working towards a collective goal (Northouse, 2016). Nothing about Jones’s actions is moral. Whether he ever was is a question for another day.

Luckily, there is a term to describe this situation – Jim Jones is a classic example of pseudotransformational leadership.  A pseudotransformational leader is self-consumed, exploitive, power oriented, and has warped moral values (Northouse, 2016). They discourage independent thinking in their followers, and exhibit little care for others. While the pseudotransformational leader has charismatic traits, and is highly inspirational to followers, he is also manipulative and dominates followers to support his own values (Northouse 2016). This type of leadership is threatening to the welfare of its followers as it ignores the common good (Northouse, 2016, p. 163). The fate of the Peoples Temple followers is tragic and serves as a tale of caution. Charismatic/transformational leaders can be very convincing, which is why they are so effective. Their traits and behaviors are inspiring to followers and “transform” them to move beyond themselves and work towards the leader’s vision. I personally think there is a fine line between charismatic/transformational and pseudotransformational leadership that needs to be carefully walked. As seen in the tragic fate of the people at Jonestown, and other cult suicides for that matter, charisma can be dangerous.

References:

Gritz, Jennie R. (2011, Nov 18). Drinking the Kool-Aid: A Survivor Remembers Jim Jones. The Atlantic. Retrieved from https://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2011/11/drinking-the-kool-aid-a-survivor-remembers-jim-jones/248723/.

History.com. (2010). Jonestown. Retrieved from http://www.history.com/topics/jonestown.

Northouse, Peter G. (2016). Leadership: Theory and Practice (7th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, Inc.

Save

Fundraiser Leadership

by

Recently, a family that used to belong to my church was in a car accident, resulting in a traumatic brain injury in their son. Eric recently was able to return home after over 100 days at three different hospitals, but is unable to walk, talk, play, and do most things that most eight-year-olds and their families take for granted. Even with health insurance, many things that Eric needs are not covered, or the items provided are the lowest quality available, such as his hospital bed. Many community members, and people all over the state have donated money, and fundraisers are being held to help support the healing and needs of his family. My sister Janice recently led the planning and execution of one such fundraiser. An Italian dinner was held at our church, along with a basket raffle, bake sale, and craft sale. This fundraiser raised over $6000 for Eric’s family. The average fundraiser dinner for our church over the past few years pulls in around $2000. What made Janice’s fundraiser so successful? There is little doubt that the success can be attributed to her effective leadership skills, particularly her ability to use different leadership styles in various situations.

The Path-Goal theory of leadership emphasizes the relationship between leadership style and both the characteristics of the followers and the task at hand (Northouse, 2016). Essentially, it postulates that leaders are responsible for assisting their followers along a path to reach their goals; and leaders do that most successfully by using a leadership style best suited for both the situation and their followers’ needs (Northouse, 2016). Four types of leadership behaviors are described by Northouse: directive, supportive, participative, and achievement-oriented. Depending on the followers and the situation characteristics, one or more of these styles of behavior may be needed or displayed in a situation. Depending on the characteristics of the followers and the situation, certain styles are better in certain situations. Janice displayed two these styles at various times in the planning and execution of this fundraiser, each of which was appropriate for the tasks at hand.

Janice was presented with the idea of having this fundraiser dinner by my 16-year-old niece Kayla. In the beginning, the task was very ambiguous: hold a dinner to raise money for Eric’s family. The followers, Kayla, her friends, and some family and church members, needed control and clarity. Although Kayla was highly ambitious, she is young and needed structure and guidance. Northouse explains that the best leadership style in a situation where the task is ambiguous and the followers need control and clarity is participative leadership (2016, p. 121). Janice used this style in the planning process. She had Kayla and the other volunteers participate in the planning. She consulted with others and helped integrate their suggestions and ideas into actual decisions regarding what the dinner would entail, fleshing out the activities, menu, price, etc.

When the actual event day came around, although there were some clear elements to the tasks at hand (people need to get their food, plates need to be cleaned, etc), the situation in general was kind of ambiguous as to how each of these things needed to happen. It was also a complex situation, as different events were happening upstairs and downstairs in the church, and many different things needed to be happening simultaneously. In the hours leading up to the dinner, Janice continued to use participative leadership style, getting volunteers’ input on how things should flow and where different events, such as the basket raffle, should be set up. Closer to event execution, Janice became more of a directive leader, which can also be effective in ambiguous situations (Northouse, 2016). She gave specific people clear tasks, divvying up the areas and responsibilities to the various volunteers. For example, certain people were specifically assigned to make pasta, clean tables, guide guests, etc. This was the best leadership style as without clear direction, volunteers would not know what to do. As many of the volunteers were teenagers, the structure was needed.

There are so many ways that Janice helped lead her volunteers along the path to successful goal completion, outdoing the previous fundraisers held before. Northouse defines four things that leaders are responsible to do to help their followers towards their goal: defining the goals, clarifying the path, removing obstacles along the path, and providing support. Janice defined clear goals and clarified to the volunteers how to reach them on the day of the event. When situations arose during the event, such as when we almost ran out of butter, Janice was on top of the situation and delegated someone to get more. Support was provided to volunteers on many levels. Janice was encouraging and kind, but also clear and unwavering when she gave tasks to do. Overall, the profound success of this fundraiser can be attributed to Janice’s ability to use the characteristics of her followers and the tasks at hand to help guide her styles of leadership she used.

References:

Northouse, Peter G. (2016). Leadership: Theory and Practice (7th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA:

SAGE Publications, Inc.

Psychodynamic Approach

by

Humans are naturally complicated and unique to one another. What influences and drives a person to do or think something may differ greatly from the next person. It is these facts that are at the heart of the Psychodynamic Approach to leadership. The Psychodynamic Approach to leadership focuses on the dynamics of human behavior, and the idea that if we study what affects a person’s behavior, we can understand how he or she functions and why they react or act in certain ways, and in turn use that information to be better leaders and followers. It is rooted in the ideas of traditional psychoanalysis and the studies of Freud. The Psychodynamic Approach is important to leadership in the workplace for two reasons. One, if a leader is successfully introspective and knows their characteristics and inner drivers, they will be in tune to their emotional responses and can guide their actions towards their team accordingly and potentially more successfully. Additionally, if they are more aware of their followers’ emotional reactions and pattern responses, they may be able to tailor their leadership style towards their followers and better guide them toward goal attainment.

Here are some basic ideas behind the Psychodynamic approach:

  • We are all a result of our past experiences. Our personalities are developed through our experiences, in particular, shaped throughout the early stages of our lives. These early experiences help to create our response patterns to others and contribute to the creation of different relationship themes.
  • There is an explanation behind every one of our actions. Even if our actions aren’t rational, a rational and logical explanation behind the actions exists.
  • Many of our feelings, fears, motives, lie in our subconscious. We aren’t always consciously aware of the things that drive our personality and actions, but they do have a major effect on our reactions and relationships.
  • How we regulate and express our emotions is central to who we are (Northouse 297). Our emotions guide how we feel about different experiences, and how we mentally file them away.
  • Everyone is different, has a unique personality, and has different motivational drivers.

It is important and prudent for anyone to be aware of what has shaped their personality and emotional responses over time understand or at least recognize his or her nuances. If we understand some of these things about ourselves, we can recognize when our negative reactions start to emerge and hopefully mitigate them. For example, over time I have come to realize that I am quick to become self-defensive when a mistake or oversight I have made is brought to my attention, especially by a superior. While I can’t exactly pinpoint this behavior towards an early experience in my life (even though many psychologists who subscribe to the old-school psychoanalytical theories of Freud would certainly point out that there must be something deep in the depths of my upbringing), I can now recognize this behavior. Ever since I realized this pattern of reaction, I have been able to develop a better emotional response to being reprimanded or reminded of something. I am able to tell myself that the mistake is not a big deal, and it is fixable, which causes me to react more appropriately without a defensive chip on my shoulder. Being able to do this makes me a better follower and a better teammate to my leader. I am more approachable, and better able to meet our team’s goals, which in turn is a success for my supervisor.

My current supervisor is Jean. She does a very good job at recognizing the individual personalities and motivational patterns of her team members. She supervises nine people, and tailors her approaches to each of us to accomplish the tasks at hand. We work for a state government office, in particular an assistance office, or what many would call “welfare.” We are responsible for evaluating people’s eligibility for benefits, processing applications, renewing benefits, acting on changes, and more. It is a complex job that has many different aspects and deadlines that are imperative to be met. If deadlines aren’t met or mistakes are made, our state government could lose funding for certain programs. Needless to say, it can be a stressful job and as we know, everyone reacts differently to stress. Jean has to make sure that her team is meeting their deadlines, and processing cases correctly.

Luckily, Jean seems to recognize the basic factors of the Psychodynamic Approach. She recognizes our individual personalities and seems to be able to guide each of us slightly differently to get the job done. One team member, Kevin, is very defensive when it comes to being told pretty much anything, often blows certain things out of proportion, and has a temper. Jean has adapted to this over the last few years. It is apparent that she has changed her tone of voice and her choice of words when instructing him on what to do next or what needs to be done. Since she has done that, the defensiveness and quick to anger has definitely decreased. Jean has tailored her communication and motivation strategies towards all of us as she recognizes our differences and has grown to realize what drives each of us.

It is obvious that Jean is more of a successful leader when she knows her subordinates and uses the information she knows to guide her processes. Leaders are more successful when they are both reflective of themselves, and aware of their followers’ emotional and motivational patterns. The Psychodynamic Approach towards leadership delves into the idea that if one tries to understand a person’s behavior and the driving forces behind it, one can use that information to lead more effectively. Any organization will have more success if it employs leaders and followers who are more introspective and can recognize the experiences that have shaped them and their reactional patterns.

References

Northouse, Peter G. (2016). Leadership: Theory and Practice (7th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA:

SAGE Publications, Inc.

Pennsylvania State University. (2017). Lesson 3: Psychodynamic Approach. In

PSYCH485: Leadership in Work Settings: Spring 2017. Retrieved from:

http://psu.instructure.com.

Skip to toolbar