Ethics are absent or at least questionable in many businesses today.  I feel the lack of ethics is also what caused our last great recession in 2008.  The fault was not just on the banks, but also our government leaders by allowing sub-prime mortgage lending to individuals who really could not afford the amount they were financing their homes for.  The theory was that everyone should be able to own a home and creative sub prime lending enabled it.  Truth be told, the banks and most likely the government knew they could not keep pace with increasing variable interest rates.  This collapse of ethical behavior in lending had disastrous results.  “More specific to the long-term viability of the financial industry, namely, the disappearance of any sense of fiduciary responsibility to the ultimate client.1 Integrity and a sense of responsibility to the industry’s customers are at the core of what a financial industry must be all about; otherwise, it’s just a big Ponzi scheme.” (Curtis,2008)

It only would have taken one person in the right position to step up and have the courage to say these loans were a bad idea.  It was great that so many people had a chance to buy a home, but the fine print needed to be enlarged and highlighted before the sale so people knew what they would eventually be on the hook for.  There was no oversight on the financial institutions in this case and it shows. Their main goal was to “sell mortgage loans to people who couldn’t afford them. Screaming ads were created to dupe people into applying for these mortgages, and new, highly misleading mortgage products were developed (teaser rates, Alt-A, etc.) to ramp up volume. Mortgage brokers were paid big fees to lure a steady stream of suckers into the scheme. There was a time when this would have been seen for what it was: predatory lending.” (Curtis, 2008)

Mission complete.  Banks like Countrywide took advantage of people and in the process almost ruined our economy.  Personally, until this crisis I never realized how much was associated with the real estate market, but it literally affected every market in our economy.  I absolutely agree that this was nothing more than a massive Ponzi Scheme and hopefully with more oversight will never be repeated.

References:

Curtis, G, 2008, White Paper No. 44 – The Financial Crisis and the Collapse of Ethical Behavior, retrieved from http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2008/12/the-financial-crisis-and-the-collapse-of-ethical-behavior/

 

Servant leadership according to Gutworth (2015) is that it is a leader centered theory putting the burden of the organizational outcomes on the leader which aims at helping followers develop into leaders in their own right rather than as parts of the work process.  Nowhere is this style of leadership more crucially needed than in the healthcare industry.  The reason for this is because the staff members who are on the “frontlines” are the ones who are interacting with patients the most, their leaders must put them first if they want the health care facility to thrive.  In fact,”the important take home lesson about Servant Leadership is the classic organization chart really needs to be rewritten, making staff who interact with customers the most important people in the organization.” (Halamka, 2012).

The hospital I currently work at takes this principle to heart.  Staff members are empowered by physicians to care for and discuss issues with patients more often than the physicians themselves due.  At every shift change both on-coming and off-going nurses go to each patient they are responsible for and communicate with them about the change in personnel and discuss any issues they have had.  Previously, this turnover would have been done without notifying the patient. Our organization values stewardship and compassion governed through personal leadership to instill trust between leaders and followers.  Additionally, our leadership continues to look for new and innovative ways to move the hospital into the future and all associates are encouraged to share their ideas on how to accomplish this.

With the current obstacles confronting the healthcare industry today it will take a unified approach among all departments in the hospital to conquer the issues at hand.  No longer can one department run one way and another function a different way, we must all lead the same so servant leadership can be developed across the board and from the top down.  We have complete buy-in!

References:

Gutworth, M., 2015, PSYCH485: Leadership in Work Settings, Penn State World Campus, retrieved from https://courses.worldcampus.psu.edu/su15/psych485/002/content/11_lesson/01_page.html

Halamka, J.,2012, Servant leadership, Life as a CIO, retrieved from http://geekdoctor.blogspot.com/2012/01/servant-leadership.html

 

The Leader-Member Exchange (LMX) Theory revolves around the relationship between the leader and members or workers.  This theory was developed in the 1970’s has since been utilized to analyze a leader’s relationship with their personnel.  It revolves around three phases that members go through to align (or not) with the leader.

The first phase is the stranger stage where new employees and leaders ” relate to each other in a within prescribed organizational roles.” (Northouse, 2013)  All employees go through this stage at one time or another in their careers and it is not necessarily a make or break point as this phase is merely a “feeling out period” as managers assess the subordinate’s abilities.

The second stage is known as the acquaintance or role making stage.  According to Elizabeth Eyre, in this stage, “managers generally expect that new team members will work hard, be loyal and prove trustworthy as they get used to their new role.” This is the stage where team disintegration begins because leaders put followers in two groups (in group and out group) at this point.

Lastly, the third phase partnership. Team members that have been classified as In group develop closer relationships with the leader and are held in high regard.  Those member in the out group struggle to get into the good graces of the leader and are often times met with distrust or dislike by the leader.

This theory provides a fairly cut and dry approach, but is it a fair viewpoint since, it is taken from the leader’s outlook?  In my current position I feel that I am part of the out group along with one other coworker, which is odd since we both have more experience in our jobs than the other employees do.  We are both older than the manager and the other employees, have great work ethic and until recently positive helpful attitudes.  We have noticed a definite line of distinction between ourselves and the others, and joking say we are outsiders, but after this week’s lesson I see how true it really is.  We are not part of decisions and the manager rarely discusses much with us at all.  In fact, we hardly see him.  From our perspective we are very frustrated because we want to be good employees and be part of the team, but what exactly can the out group do to be included?

References:

Eyre, E., No Date, The Leader-Member Exchange Theory, Getting the Best From all Team Members, retrieved from: http://www.mindtools.com/pages/article/leader-member-exchange.htm

Northouse, P.G. (2013).  Leadership: Theory and Practice.  Los Angeles: Sage Publications

 

Christopher Van Wagner

In military each individual leader must understand the environment, their personnel and the needed result and lack of personnel and time does not permit the use of a contingency theory of leadership.  Because the leader must adapt to many situations and deal with many different personalities understanding the path-goal theory is extremely beneficial.  In path-goal theory, the leader needs to figure out how to use a leadership style that allows him/her to motivate employees. Thus, the leader needs to complement or supplement what is missing in the work environment. (Gutworth, 2015)

The theory is identified by four leadership behaviors. Each leadership behavior aims to maximize worker outcomes by recognizing the impact of both environmental factors and worker characteristics in job performance. (Cross, 2015)  The first factor is Directive Leadership.  Under this style, the leader basically spells out the goal and lays out a road map on how to accomplish it.  To most outsiders, this would seem to be the defining style for military leaders to use.  Today, however, this style is most prevalent in training scenarios and deployments.  Another type of leadership style under the path-goal theory is Supportive Leadership, which is typically utilized after deployment by leaders helping with personal, family and other issues stemming from long periods away from home in hostile areas.  Additionally, time off is usually abundant and major efforts are made to increase morale.

The third style is called Participative Leadership, and this is the point to which subordinates have input to the process.  This is a relatively new concept utilized by the military (at least in the Navy.)  Examples of this style are process improvement events.  These events are modeled after the Toyota process where employees had input into how their tasks were accomplished.  By listening to the subordinates the leader displays a genuine care for how the worker feels and it also instills ownership. Lastly, is the Achievement Oriented style where “subordinate goals are designed to encourage high performance, and supervisors exhibit confidence in employees to motivate them in meeting performance goals.”(Cross, 2015)  In the military this style is probably utilized more than in the civilian world because it depends on the workers passion for their work and what could drive passion more than the selfless sacrifice they make for their country every day!

 

References:

Cross, V., 2015, The Path-Goal Theory of Leadership in Companies, Chron, retrieved from: http://smallbusiness.chron.com/pathgoal-theory-leadership-companies-20568.html

Gutworth, M., 2015, PSYCH485: Leadership in Work Settings, Penn State Angel, retrieved from: https://courses.worldcampus.psu.edu/su15/psych485/002/common/homepage.html

 

“Self-confidence is another trait that helps one become a leader.”  (Northouse, 2013) In leadership a person must be sure of their actions and decisions in order to project a confident model for your subordinates. “Not only does confidence allow you to make the tough decisions that people expect from a strong leader but it’s reassuring to your employees.” (Dao, 2008) “It includes a sense of self-esteem and self-assurance and the belief that one can make a difference.” (Northouse, 2013) If employees see a lack of confidence, they are more likely to not trust in you or feel that you are strong enough to make the right decisions on their behalf; in fact, a lack of confidence can show weakness and the inability take responsibility for you actions which could led to passing-the-buck.  And, what employee would want to take the fall for something his/her supervisor did or did not do?

While having self-confidence is a required quality of a leader, too much confidence is not.  Arrogance or cockiness is the thoughts or actions that come from thinking that you are better or more superior to others.  This can lead to problems with the team and leader relationship like lack of self-confidence can.  “Anecdotal evidence suggests that interactions with arrogant individuals can be uncomfortable and that this effect is amplified when the arrogant individuals occupy positions of authority in organizations.”  (SIOP, 2015)  All too often employees with low self-esteem or who lack self-confidence are railroaded by the much stronger personality arrogant leader, while an employee with a strong personality and great self-esteem may get backlash and reprimanded for not following orders.

To be a good leader one must walk that fine line between the two personality traits.  They must have the confidence to know they are making solid decisions and yet understand that they do not know everything and cannot be afraid to ask for assistance.  They must also realize they will make mistakes and that they must accept and own up to them without putting their personnel under the bus by blaming the employee.  An experienced and confident leader will build a solid team that knows it can depend on him/her to have their best interests in mind and not worry that the leader will put him or herself ahead of the team.

 

 

References:

Dao, Francisco, 2008, Without Confidence There is no Leadership, retrieved from: http://www.inc.com/resources/leadership/articles/20080301/dao.html

Northouse, P.G. (2013). Leadership Theory and Practice (6th ed.) Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications Inc

Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology (SIOP), 2015, Arrogance: A Formula for Leadership Failure, retrieved from: http://www.siop.org/tip/july12/04silverman.aspx