Alicia McCormick

Toy Story’s Woody: Toys Unite!

April 21, 2014 by Alicia McCormick

The Disney Pixar movie, Toy Story, is loved by young and old alike. This is the reason the beloved characters and story were continued through two subsequent movies, Toy Story 2 and Toy Story 3, making it a trilogy of behavior to evaluate (and enjoy!). The characters in the movie span personality characteristics across many dimensions allowing the audience to relate to all the characters. The group of toys owned by Andy is a small, well-constructed work group in which Woody the cowboy is the leader. Woody’s leadership can be assessed through the “Leadership Grid”, developed by Blake and Mouton (1985) (Northouse, 2012) in reference to the skills approach. Woody employs a Team Management style when employing his leadership behaviors as compared to the Leadership Grid. Blake and Mouton (1985) state that most leaders have a dominant management style that they use most of the time; however they utilize a backup style in times under pressure (Northouse, 2012). Woody’s backup style lies with the Authority-compliance management spectrum.

The Skills Approach attempts to view leadership actions and behaviors. Two categories have arisen through both the Ohio State Studies in the late 1940s, based on studies by Stogdill (1948) and the University of Michigan Studies around the same time (Northouse, 2012). The most common developmental tool through this approach, the Leadership Grid, was created by Blake and Mouton in 1964 and has been revised several times (Northouse, 2012). The two categories according to the Leadership Grid by Blake and Mouton (1985) are concern for production and concern for people. These categories reflect initiating structure and consideration, coined by Stogdill (1974), and employee orientation and production orientation labeled by the University of Michigan studies (Northouse, 2012). Concern for production is attributed to issues such as attention to policy decisions, workload, and process issues (Northouse, 2012). In essence the concern for production behavior category is what the leadership behavior is seeking to accomplish. Concern for people contains such behavior as promoting positive social relations, good working conditions, and building organizational commitment and trust (Northouse, 2012).

Retrieved from: http://clouducation.wordpress.com/2012/03/07/5-educational-leadership-realities/

Woody is in the leadership position of the group of toys. His behavior is illustrated throughout all 3 of the movies. His style is reflective in Team Management on the Leadership Grid. Team Management leader behavior is seen as: “stimulates participation, acts determined, gets issues into the open, makes priorities clear, follows through, behaves open-mindedly, and enjoys working”(Northouse, 2012, p. 81). His leadership behaviors are committed to doing what will keep the toys safe and being available for their owner Andy when he needs them. Woody engages the toys in weekly meetings to keep all the toys committed and informed, to educate on safety and protocol, or as needed when a problem arises. During meetings the toys are encouraged to participate and share ideas with the group. In the original movie, when Andy is having a birthday party, the toys are congregated together to receive the information of which new toys Andy receives so that the toys are prepared for whatever comes their way. Woody continually supports the other toys by reaffirming their place in Andy’s room. No matter what Andy receives they will deal with it together and no one is being thrown away, a large fear among toys. The process by which they find out what Andy receives for his birthday is well constructed and orchestrated by Woody, showing his concern for production. The army guys are deployed orderly to obtain the information and Woody has the toys in Andy’s room gathered to hear the news. Woody knows what is needed to accomplish the goals that are set.

In Toy Story 3, Woody is concerned for the well-being of not only the toys but Andy as well. Although Andy has grown, Woody is committed to being available if he should ever need him or the other toys. Woody continually acts determined to this end and gets issues out into the open. Both the meetings and ultimate goal commitment are demonstrative of Team Management from the Leadership Grid (Northouse, 2012). Woody stimulates the group to share their ideas and thoughts so that they may stay together. The group’s thoughts are important to Woody as the leader and although he does not always agree with the group, he is continually open-minded in receiving their thoughts and ideas. The toys have also discussed what they have learned at such meetings as “Rust Prevention” and “Battery Safety” throughout the trilogy, illustrating Woody’s continual policy development and education to the group. His persistence to keep the group safe and committed through his openness to ideas, his stimulation of participation from the group, his determination, and making the priorities clear show his Team Management style of leadership.

Through the skills approach Leadership Grid, Blake and Mouton (1985) said that most leaders have a dominant style and at times, use a backup style (Northouse, 2012). There are times where Woody feels that the group is jeopardizing their safety and in these moments, while under pressure, employs his backup style. Woody tends to shift his style to the Authority-Compliance Management style as a backup. In this type of leadership style the leader is seen as controlling and demanding (Northouse, 2012). These situations tend to arise in the movies in several capacities. In Toy Story 3, Woody feels as though they should stay with Andy but the group does not want to be stored away and never played with so they feel they should move on. Woody attempts to assert his authority by demanding the group stay with Andy. When under pressure, Blake and Mouton (1985) state that the leader will resort to their backup style (Northouse, 2012). Woody only resorts to this type of behavior when he feels the group is making the wrong decision and feels pressured to do so as though he has no other option to change their minds.

Woody and the gang from Toy Story exhibit the leader and subordinate relationship that resembles Team Management Style from the Leadership Grid developed by Blake and Mouton (1985) (Northouse, 2012). As discussed, Woody only deploys his backup style when under pressure. The safety and commitment of the toys to Andy is fostered in a positive environment by Woody in order to preserve the group’s emotional needs and well-being. Woody displays more commitment to the overall goals and group than most leaders we see today.

References

Northouse, Peter G. (2013). Leadership: Theory and Practice. Sixth Edition. Sage Publications.

Transformationally Disguised: A Wolf in Sheep’s Clothes (on Wall Street)

April 11, 2014 by Alicia McCormick

In the Martin Scorsese movie, The Wolf on Wall Street, Leonardo DiCaprio’s character Jordan Belfort (Paramount Pictures, 2013) exhibits characteristics consistent with transformational leadership, however his unmoral behavior, self-interested, and exploitive tendencies push his leadership to the pseudotransformational category. Jordan Belfort begins in a low-level position at a Wall Street Firm but then becomes unemployed. Jordan, with convincing from his wife, decides to take a position with a penny stock firm in Long Island. From there, Belfort takes his aggressive, visionary style, never settle attitude and begins his own company. Belfort possesses the ability to influence and elevate the emotional levels of people therefore he is able to create a monster business that transforms the lives of many people, producing millions in revenue. In the movie, Jordan Belfort says, “I was born with a gift to persuade people, to lead” (Paramount Pictures, 2013). His employees are devout and follow him through any and everything to develop the picture he paints. Jordan is able to build trust by conveying his image of self-confidence and personal example. Jordan Belfort is able to create personalized leadership through personal bonds with his followers by applying empathy at the social cues they exhibit in their emotional state. His employees are inspired and excited by Jordan, leading to increases in productivity and effort (PSU WC, L. 10, p. 4). The employees look to Jordan for answers, on how to run their daily business with clients. They do not think for themselves, they believe and rely on Jordan to lead them to their vision. Belfort’s ethics, morality, and ultimate arrest prove the shift from authentic transformational leadership to pseudotransformational leadership. Although many characteristics are mirrored, the main objective of transformational leaders is socialized, moral uplifting (Northouse, 2013) whereas the psuedotransformational leader has warped values and is self-consumed (Northouse, 2013). Taking his vision, his inspiration to followers, and the relationships he builds with trust and self-confidence we can view Jordan Belfort as an example of transformational leaders turn pseudotransformational (PSU WC, L. 10, p. 4). Belfort is able to transform a mix-matched, low potential group of men and women into a killer brand on Wall Street.

Jordan Belfort was a man that saw a larger picture of wealth on Wall Street and wanted a piece for himself. The lesson commentary states “…transformational leaders are future-oriented. They recognize the problems of a present system and offer a vision to overcome these problems” (PSU WC, L. 10, p. 4). The vision that Jordan Belfort had included wealth, prestige, and status through his own stock brokerage company. He had the ability to share his vision with such passion and drive. His vision, he knew, needed more than just him to achieve his goal of wealth therefore looked to others to join his vision. Belfort had immense self-confidence and led by personal example, building the image and trust of his followers, displayed by followers of transformational leaders (PSU WC, L. 10, p. 4). Though Belfort was not known to have any moral conviction or show any sort of personal sacrifice, he moved his followers with his actions, never doubting himself and his own personal goals. He also was sure to create an atmosphere in which he didn’t ever need to make personal sacrifices, though displaying the image that he would. His own personal goal of wealth came first however he displayed to his employees that their happiness and well-being came first.

His motivation to those that worked for him is a prime characteristic of transformational leaders. Jordan’s ability to excite people was his main motivational piece. By persuading friends and his parents to join his business venture, he was able to make his vision a reality. His influence was felt emotionally by the ones who joined with him. Transformational leaders have personalized leadership, they pick up on followers’ social cues and emotional states therefore share strong, personal bonds with them (Hughes, Ginnett, & Curphy, 2012, as referenced in PSU WC, L. 10, p. 3). In Jordan’s case however, he used their strong relationships to gain personally while they also benefited. The emotion he elicited from people is another prime factor in his ability to achieve his vision. One of the first meetings where Jordan shares his vision is in a dusty old warehouse. He is talking to a group of friends, his excitement and anticipation can be felt with his upcoming venture. It does not take him but a few sentences to gain strong commitment and devotion of all the men to join as stockbrokers with his new company, “Stratton Oakmont”. The first employees in this meeting are drawn to Jordan’s vision, excited and willing to do whatever Jordan tells them is best, displaying follower characteristics of transformational leadership (PSU WC, L. 10, p. 4). Another scene in which Jordan exhibits his ability to excite is at a party with the entire office and many party guests. The firm is hosting a party in the early days of their success; Belfort grabs the microphone and tells the crowd how wonderful it is to be them, to be a part of their company. It is not merely that he says the words; he moves his entire being and is able to command the crowd to cheer and beg for more. The emotions involved with his leadership are again pronounced in this moment. Jordan possesses strong rhetorical skills, he has strong ability to “heighten followers’ emotional levels and inspire them to embrace the vision” (PSU WC, L. 10, p. 4). Jordan Belfort’s employees expect more of themselves because Jordan does as well.

The truth is that Jordan Belfort possessed no moral conviction or the need to make personal sacrifice, he exhibits strong characteristics that exude and produce transformation, however without the moral conviction his leadership is now categorized as transformational leadership because of the negative characteristics (Northouse, 2013). His leadership is saturated with vision and the ability to connect the vision emotionally with his followers. In turn, his employees adore Jordan and do whatever he tells them to do regarding the business. They grow their firm into heights of wealth that none of them ever imagined. Jordan Belfort had characteristics that made him into a transformational leader. The defining characteristic for transformational leadership is moral uplifting (Northouse, 2013). On this level Jordan Belfort now becomes a pseudotransformational leader, corrupting one stockbroker at a time.

References

Northouse, Peter G. (2013). Leadership: Theory and Practice. Sixth Edition. Sage Publications.

Paramount Pictures. (2013). The Wolf on Wall Street. Retrieved from http://www.thewolfofwallstreet.com/

The Pennsylvania State University. (2013). PSYCH 484: Leadership in Work Settings Lesson 10: Transformational Leadership. Retrieved from https://courses.worldcampus.psu.edu/sp14/psych485/002/content/10_lesson/printlesson.html

Situations Arise

April 9, 2014 by Alicia McCormick

In every workplace, home environment, classroom, church congregation, etc. there are people of every skill set and temperament. Leaders in these situations often adapt when one-on-one with the people of various situations. Situational leadership is an approach that, unlike many other theories or approaches, takes a prescriptive angle to leadership. In other words, the approach can be viewed as guidelines to the leadership that should be taken. Although in these settings leaders will more times than not be faced with leading an entire group, the focus can often come down to the interactions between the leader and each follower individually. Situational leadership handles situations individually by accommodating individuals by combining their skill set (competence) and their commitment to the organization. By assessing each follower on an individual basis the leader can adjust and adapt their style of leadership appropriately. The development by Blanchard (1985) of the SLII Model will be used to demonstrate a manager I deal with frequently. The SLII Model uses 4 styles of leadership combined with the 4 levels of development. For privacy purposes we will call him “Chris”. Chris has 3 subordinates, each with a unique set of abilities, commitment to their company, and a relationship with Chris. Situational leadership is perfect to apply to his situation. It is versatile and can be adjusted rather quickly in order to be the most effective.
Blanchard (1985) and Blanchard et al. (1985) developed an illustration (see below) to visualize the concepts of the SLII Model for easy understanding when using situational leadership (Northouse, 2013). This approach encompasses 4 styles: S1 Directing; high directive and low supportive, S2 Coaching; high directive and high supportive, S3 Supporting; high supportive and low directive, S4 Delegating; low supportive and low directive (Northouse, 2013). The 4 development levels range from D1 (low, developing) to D4 (high, developed) (Northouse, 2013). The 4 leadership styles and development levels are used in the various stages on Chris’s team. Mark has only recently joined the team but has previous experience in their field of operation. Steve has been with Chris’s team for just under a year and this is his first time in the industry. Bob has been with this company for over 30 years, was in management for 20 years, and is now simply finishing out his remaining few years before eligible for retirement. Each category can be applied in majority to each of them yet it will show that it also changes as the situations change.
Beginning with Mark, Chris is most often placed in the S1 category. Even though mark has previous experience in this field, he is required to learn the policies and practices of Chris’s company. Chris has taken a directive approach, focusing on goal achievement in the beginning weeks of employment. Chris gives instruction through a calendar of events and training modules to be completed by certain dates. The supportive behavior is low at this point in their relationship although it has recently been evolving. The line into S2 has been crossed more frequently now that will has some time in with the company. Mark and Chris are developing their interactions and Mark is beginning to be more self-sufficient. In way of development, Mark is steadily reaching D2 but still mainly in D1 which is consistent with leadership style.
Steve has been with Chris’s team for one year. Although Steve now has one year of experience and is familiar with the company yet he still requires the S2 coaching style with high supportive leadership and high directive leadership. Steve displays low confidence and requires specific goals. Chris is required to give directive support toward weekly, monthly, and quarterly goals. Chris offers his own “curbside coaching” in which after they are finished at an appointment they discuss practices that were employed. Chris always elicits input from Steve in order to boost his confidence and build their relationship. Steve is in the D2 phase of development. Chris’s goal is to put him in the D3 phase in the near future. The Supporting Style in S3 is the next level for Steve’s career and relationship with Chris.
Bob is a veteran in their field. He has been employed at many levels in the company but is now simply working as an agent for Chris in order to meet his financial needs and eventually retire. What is interesting in this relationship is that the leadership role is shared. At the majority of the time an S4 style is employed where Bob knows what is expected of him and they share a daily check in so they are on the same page yet Bob is in charge of his schedule and Chris rarely intervenes. On various occasions an S3 style is used. Although Bob has been with the company for so long, it has been a substantial amount of time since he has been out on his own, not in management. Chris is fairly new to management and has new ideas that Bob is happy to use. Bob will explain what issues he is encountering and Chris offers a fresh perspective in way of advice, generally something Bob has not yet used. Bob also offers Chris various advice on management in the company. Their relationship displays support back and forth interaction yet very little to no directive style. Bob is developed with only small needs to vary his level of development therefore his is classified as D4.
We can all say with confidence that situations change, people change, and relationships change. Roadblocks arise, new information is released, and product adjustments are made. The elements in the SLII Model illustrate an effective image in order to visualize the leadership styles combining with subordinate development levels. Chris and his team offer an exclusive look into the everyday changing environment as it applies to the SLII Model of situational leadership.

References
Northouse, Peter G. (2013). Leadership: Theory and Practice. Sixth Edition. Sage Publications.

Blanchard et al. (1985) Situational Leadership II

Parenting: Servant Leadership, No Doubt!

April 6, 2014 by Alicia McCormick

Being a parent is one of the simplest ways to illustrate servant leadership. As a parent, putting my children first, helping them to grow, and prosper is at the forefront of my leadership style. A parent’s way of leading their child through life varies, just as leadership in an organization varies. My house IS my organization. I joke that I am the CFO while my husband retains CEO status. This organization (my home) is run with more elements of servant leadership than any other leadership style. Raising my children, my own desires have not just been pushed aside but I am happy and desire it to be this way. My goal and mission in this crazy thing they call parenthood is that at the end of my children’s adolescence, they will be ready, willing, and able to carry on as independent adults that are productive parts of society. By choosing servant leadership as the catalyst to my parenting, the context and culture in our home (organization), my attributes as the parent (leader), and my children’s (follower’s) receptivity all play a role in the success we share together. The behaviors I display as a servant leader produce outcomes today and will produce outcomes in my children’s lives down the road.
Servant leaders place their followers first, empower them, and help to develop them to their fullest potential. Robert Greenleaf (1970) developed the theory of servant leadership. Others, including Graham (1991), Spears (2002), Russell and Stone (2002), and Patterson (2003), have further developed the theory. Spears (2002) sorted Greenleaf’s writings and produced a list of 10 characteristics that characterize servant leaders. They are: Listening, Empathy, Healing, awareness, persuasion, conceptualization, foresight, stewardship, commitment to the growth of people, building community (Northouse, 2013). Russell and Stone (2002) produced a model of servant leadership that displays attributes, functional characteristics, and accompanying characteristics (Northouse, 2013). Patterson (2003) developed a model based on values that specify building blocks for the ethical behavior displayed by servant leaders (Northouse, 2013). Another model is based on Liden, Wayne, Zhao, and Henderson (2008) that makes use of three factors (Northouse, 2013). This model shows antecedent conditions, servant behaviors, and leadership outcomes in an effort to make sense of the intensely complex theory of servant leadership (Northouse, 2013).
The behaviors in the model of servant leadership can be seen when evaluating my leadership as a parent. The conceptualization I possess for my children is a future as ready, willing, and productive adults. For emotional healing, who is the first person many people want when they need a shoulder to lean on or cry on? Correct. Their mom. There is never a time that I am not available when my children need someone. In order to help my children grow and succeed, I spend at least an hour each day reading, writing, and practicing other skills they are developing in school. Their participation in after school activities is also important. Development in social areas of their lives and commitment to other organizations foster community ties. Teaching my children to use manners and do “the right thing in the right way” (Northouse, 2013, p. 229) is an ongoing process and behavior practice that I value highly. In order for my children to behave in a way that will be productive and respectful in the future, I aim to continually perform acts of kindness and make rational decisions based on the truth even if the truth is hard to deal with instead of taking the easy way or making decisions based on emotions. Within my home, many decisions are made as a family. I feel that with my children participating in decisions, large and small, they have a sense of control to their lives. Realistically, they do not have complete control, they are only children. However, by asking their opinions and eliciting conversations among us, their sense of unity with the family is heightened and continuing to develop. The culture in our home is conducive to their growth. The goal is for their adult selves to perform contributing acts as respectable adults in the community.
The 10 characteristics compiled from Greenleaf’s writings by Spears (2002) blend with the leader behaviors found in Liden, et al (2008)’s model. These characteristics, listening, empathy, healing, awareness, persuasion, conceptualization, foresight, stewardship, commitment to the growth of people, and building community, further compound to demonstrate the pure devotion servant leaders have to their followers. In my case, each day of my life is spent in the commitment to my children, serving to develop their growth in a positive way.
The outcome of my parenting, my servant leadership, varies from day to day. My children are growing into young adults before my eyes. In moments I am aware of the way this organization (my home) is the breeding ground. As I watch my daughter make homemade cards and decorate Easter eggs for the elderly across the street. As I see my son go out of his way to help another boy clean up a spilled bottle of water, while other children simply walk by, makes me see the goal of developing them into decent people is being realized, little by little.
While being a parent, the servant leadership behaviors I display cover the models presented. Combining the culture and context of my home with my behaviors as a parent, leads to outcomes consistent with the servant leadership models. Servant leadership as applied to parenting was never a question to me. As a parent, many things are uncertain. However, the commitment I have to their upbringing, the positive influence I choose to pursue for their benefit is never a question. I am a servant to their lives, for now and always.

References
Northouse, Peter G. (2013). Leadership: Theory and Practice. Sixth Edition. Sage Publications