Leadership

PSYCH 485 blog

Servant Leadership in Todays Organizations

by

Servant leadership is one of the predominately recognized and researched leadership perspectives. Though research on servant leadership was recently conducted and did not occur at its formulation by Robert K. Greenleaf (1970). Greenleaf described servant leadership as the behaviors demonstrated by a leader that place followers first, which are supportive of follower development, and do not affect the least privileged in society, Greenleaf (1970) (as cited in Northouse, 2016). The first major research into servant leadership determined ten characteristics central to the development of servant leadership, listening, empathy, healing, awareness, persuasion, conceptualization, foresight, stewardship, commitment to the growth of people, and building community (Spears, 2002). The most recent research on servant leadership, building on years of servant leadership research, has conceptualized an empirically supported and refined model of servant leadership (Liden, Panaccio, Meuser, Hu, & Wayne, 2014). The refined servant leadership model determined seven leadership behaviors indicative of the servant leadership process. The leadership style implemented by my current organization and therefore by me as a construction project manager, is representative of these seven servant leadership behaviors. However, in my experience with my current organization, the application of servant leadership behaviors is not effective with some followers’ development.

The seven core servant leadership behaviors are as follows, conceptualizing, emotional healing, putting followers first, helping followers grow and succeed, behaving ethically, empowering, and creating value for the community (Liden et al., 2014). Conceptualizing represents a leader’s thorough understanding of their organization, which allows a leader to adequately address problems according to organizational goals (Northouse, 2016). Many teams and phases are involved in the construction of neighborhoods. When problems occur during a particular phase, it is my responsibility to know how a particular setback will affect the goal attainment process, creatively find a solution, and insure that long-term organizational goals are still met. Emotional healing involves being sensitive to the well-being of others and a willingness to help others resolve problems (Northouse, 2016). At a personal level, various followers have been assisted with enrolling in various forms of personal counseling programs. At an organizational level, followers are provided water during the summer and propane heaters during the winter at an expense to the organization. Putting followers first consists of placing follower concerns and needs above the leaders (Northouse, 2016). Many times throughout a work week I stop what I am doing and tend to the concerns of the teams for which I am responsible. Helping followers grow and succeed involves understanding follower goals and assisting followers in accomplishing those goals both personally and professionally (Northouse, 2016). My organization provides followers with the opportunities for continued technical training and provided with retirement investing counseling. Behaving ethically represents doing what is right, included such ethical standards as honesty and fairness (Northouse, 2016). My organization does not allow short-cuts to be taken, and prides itself on its community responsibility and quality of product. Empowering consists of the sharing of leadership, allowing followers to be self-sufficient and make decisions (Northouse, 2016). Each team or trade is a satellite division of the organization, each responsible for creating schedules, and maintaining deadlines. Each team also decides how to best apply there trade to a particular phase. Creating value for the community involves the conscious and intentional giving back to the community (Northouse, 2016). An organizational philosophy exists, that which we produce for the community creates the spaces were the majority of people’s lives happen. My organization also sponsors local youth events and activities and is involved in supporting and organizing a yearly breast cancer walk.

The Liden et al. (2014) model of servant leadership also determined the conditions in which the application of servant leadership is possible. The three antecedent conditions for the successful application of servant leadership are context and culture, leader attributes, and follower receptivity (Liden et al., 2014). Context and culture consists of organizational environment components that contribute to the successful occurrence of servant leadership (Northouse, 2016). Servant leadership is possible and successful in my organization because our organizational context is providing a necessity to the community, and our organizational culture shares power. Leader attributes represent the ideas and traits that influence and provide a leader with the disposition to demonstrate servant leadership behaviors (Northouse, 2016). For instance, I am capable of successfully applying servant leadership because I am empathetic, moral, and not self-servant, I appreciate helping others develop or increase their well-being, as it provides me satisfaction. Follower receptivity involves the willingness of followers to be receptive to servant leadership (Northouse, 2016). For the most part the application of servant leadership in my organization is very successful for both followers and community. However, not all teams or followers in my organization benefit from the organizations application of servant leadership. One particular team, the roofers, does not wish to develop supportive relationships, and think they are perfectly capable of handling their own professional and personal development. Therefore the application of servant leadership is not successful with these followers.

The outcomes of servant leadership provide for follower performance and growth, organizational performance, and societal impact (Liden et al., 2014). As research has determined and my current organizational experience demonstrates, not all persons or teams are interested in the aspects of servant leadership and the benefits it provides to followers, and prefer to go it alone. However, given the community focus, which is the cornerstone of servant leadership, I think servant leadership bares consideration of organizational application. After all, in my opinion, it is extremely important for all leaders to consider the implications of their behaviors outside organizational settings. Perhaps less unethical leadership practices would occur if leaders first consider how their actions will affect communities and society.

 

References:

Greenleaf, R. K. (1970). The Servant as Leader, The Robert K. Greenleaf Center, Indianapolis, IN.

Liden, R. C., Panaccio, A., Meuser, J. D., Hu, J., & Wayne, S. J. (2014). 17 Servant Leadership: Antecedents, Processes, and Outcomes. The Oxford handbook of leadership and organizations, 357-379. Online. Retrieved from https://books.google.com/books

Northouse, P.G. (2016).  Leadership: Theory and Practice. Los Angeles: Sage Publications.

Spears, L. C. (2002). Tracing the past, present, and future of servant-leadership. Focus on leadership: Servant-leadership for the twenty-first century, 1-16. Online. Retrieved from http://civicleadership.lipscomb.edu/uploads/41763.pdf

 

Effective Teams in Organizations

by

To date, the collective achievement of goals is becoming more prevalent in organizations (Northouse, 2016). This has occurred due to a shift in current organizational structuring to team-based structures (Northouse, 2016). Organizations are flattening their organizational structure and applying less authoritative structures. Thus, traditional vertical decision making is replaced with lateral decision making (Aime, Humphrey, DeRue, & Paul, 2014). Organizations are implementing heterarchy structures instead of the traditional hierarchy structure. A team-based heterarchy structure consists of the dynamic sharing or shifting of leadership or power that occurs between team members based on the relevant resources of an individual to a given situation or goal accomplishment (Aime et al., 2014). Thus an individual exerts leadership influence when their specific skills and knowledge are best suited for goal accomplishment. This does not imply that teams strictly function autonomously, many teams have formal leaders. Simply, that when a heterarchy structure is present or flattening has occurred in an organization, team members can also demonstrate leadership behaviors that influence other team members toward effective goal accomplishment (Northouse, 2016).

Current team-based leadership research has determined six factors or conditions that contribute to team effectiveness in organizations that allow team-based heterarchy structures. The six contributing factors to team effectiveness are, compelling purpose, right people, real team, clear norms of conduct, supportive organizational context, and team-focused coaching (Hackman, 2012). These six contributing factors to team effectiveness were a refining and extension of previous team-based research on team effectiveness, which determined eight contributing factors, Larson & LaFasto (1989) (as cited in Northouse, 2016). Current team-based research found similarities in two sets of two criteria, thus refined four original criteria into two contributing factors. In my experience leading teams, the greater prevalence of these six conditions contributes to greater team effectiveness in a heterarchy structure. Given the focus of this blog, I will compare and contrast the organizational teams I currently lead as a construction project manager, all of which share leadership. To demonstrate support for current research on team effectiveness and support for the idea that the prevalence of a heterarchy system alone is not adequate to make beneficial the implementation of a heterarchy structure (Northouse, 2016). As stated, in my current profession, teams and a heterarchy structure are the norm. However not all teams are effective in this structure, my roofing team lacks three factors for team effectiveness and do not perform as effectively as the other teams I lead.

A compelling purpose represents clear and energizing objectives that orient teams toward the collective achievement of goals, making full use of individual talent (Hackman, 2012). All of the teams I manage have a clear understanding of their responsibilities and are motivated toward organizational goal achievement. The right people involve the variety of skills, knowledge, and interpersonal skills prevalent in individual members of a team necessary for the accomplishment of goals (Hackman, 2012). All of the teams I lead except for the roofers possess the variety of skills necessary for team effectiveness. The roofers do have the skills and knowledge necessary to accomplish organizational goals; however they lack the interpersonal skills necessary for effective teams, the ability to work with others within reasonable emotional and moral parameters. A real team consists of a sense of unity or identification (Hackman, 2012). Larson and LaFasto (1989) compare this team effectiveness factor to team spirit. Again, all of the teams I lead demonstrate a sort of brotherhood amongst the members of their team, accept for the roofers. The roofers reflect an uneasy sense of unity, individuality is cornerstone. Clear norms of conduct involve defined norms for conduct and excellence (Hackman, 2012). There are clear organizational codes of conduct in place, and all persons adhere to these conduct norms. However, at a team level, the roofers do not have defined conduct norms. Within their team, the roofers do not regulate interpersonal behaviors. Supportive organizational context represents the support, resources, rewards, and necessary training for goal accomplishment (Hackman, 2012). Equal and adequate support, resources and monetary compensation and bonuses are prevalent in all of the organizational teams I manage. However, the organization that I work for does not offer training for teams, teams are expected to be proficient in accomplishing organizational goals. Team-focused coaching consists of the implementation of the most effective leadership, based on team needs and specific goal accomplishment (Hackman, 2012). All of the teams I lead are provided situational based leadership, as the needs of teams differ because each team’s goal accomplishment varies.

Organizations which implement heterarchy structures and provide teams with the aforementioned relevant factors to team effectiveness benefit greatly. These benefits include, increased productivity, effective use of resources, better decision making and problem solving, more quality outcomes or services, and greater innovation and creativity (Northouse, 2016). The team-based leadership research described in this blog provides supportive evidence for the benefits provided to organizations that implement heterarchy structures that assist teams with the necessary contributing factors for team effectiveness. Perhaps more organizations should consider losing traditional authority structures and allow teams the ability to exert leadership in the accomplishment of organizational goals. The personal example described in this blog serves as a reminder to organizations that do implement heterarchy structures. The simple implementation of a heterarchy structure is not enough for organizational teams to be effective. The previously described six contributing factors to team effectiveness in heterarchy structures must also be prevalent for teams to be effective in a heterarchy structure.

 

References:

Aime, F., Humphrey, S., DeRue, D. S., & Paul, J. B. (2014). The riddle of heterarchy: Power transitions in cross-functional teams. Academy of Management Journal, 57(2), 327-352. Online. Retrieved from http://web.a.ebscohost.com.ezaccess.libraries.psu.edu/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?sid=a69ac930-9ed9-49ac-aab7-02a88787fe55%40sessionmgr4010&vid=1&hid=4209

Hackman, J. R. (2012). From causes to conditions in group research. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 33(3), 428-444. Online. Retrieved from http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/job.1774/epdf

Larson, C. E., & LaFasto, F. M. (1989). Teamwork: What must go right/what can go wrong (Vol. 10). Sage.

Northouse, P.G. (2016).  Leadership: Theory and Practice. Los Angeles: Sage Publications.

Sources of Leadership Power and Follower Effectiveness

by

Leadership is described as, a complex multidimensional process in which an individual influences members of a group to achieve a common goal (Northouse, 2016). In order to exert influence on followers in the obtainment of a goal, a leader must first have the ability to exert influence. The ability of a leader to influence followers is a function of a leader’s power, which is the ability or potential to exert influence (Hughes, Ginnett, & Curphy, 1993). Influence represents the degree to which a leader affects follower attitude, opinion, and behavior (Hughes et al., 1993). Research has demonstrated that referent power contributes most to follower effectiveness because of the influence tactics typically implemented to influence followers. Leaders with referent power typically implement influence statistics that build-up followers versus tearing them down (Hughes et al., 1993). Even though the situation affects the type of power a leader should use, the use of referent power has been shown to contribute to increases in follower motivation, satisfaction, and performance (Yukl, 1989). In my experience as a follower in various situations, these research findings hold true. Leaders with referent power increase follower effectiveness through motivation, satisfaction, and performance.

The research of French and Raven (1959) determined five sources or bases of social power from which an individual could influence others. Expert power is a function of the leader, and is the amount of knowledge an individual possess compared to other group members (French & Raven, 1959). Referent power is a function of the leader and followers, and involves the strength of the relationship between leader and followers (French & Raven, 1959). Legitimate power is a function of the situation, and consists of formal authority an individual has due to an assigned organizational role (French & Raven, 1959). Reward power is a function of the leader, followers, and the situation, and is an individual’s control over desired resources, raises, promotions, tenure, etc. (French & Raven, 1959). Coercive power is a function of the leader and the situation, and involves the ability to control others through fear or loss (French & Raven, 1959).

The most promising research on influence tactics considers nine behaviors by which an individual can affect follower attitude, opinion, and behavior. Rational persuasions are tactics that use of logic and fact to influence others (Yukl, Lepsinger, & Lucia, 1992). Inspirational appeals are tactics that provoke emotion and enthusiasm (Yukl et al., 1992). Consultations are tactics that involve followers in planning (Yukl et al., 1992). Ingratiation is a tactic that attempts to put followers in a good mood (Yukl et al., 1992). Personal appeals are tactics that make appeals based on friendships (Yukl et al., 1992). Exchanges are tactics that involve the exchange of favors (Yukl et al., 1992). Coalition tactics involve using the support of followers to influence a target (Yukl et al., 1992). Pressure tactics involve the use of threats or reminders to influence (Yukl et al., 1992). Legitimizing tactics involves influence based in a position of authority (Yukl et al., 1992). Six of these nine influence tactics are commonly implemented by individuals with referent power and consider to build-up followers. Individuals with referent power apply inspirational appeals, consultations, ingratiation, personal appeals, exchanges, and coalition tactics, but typically do not implement legitimizing or pressure tactics (Hughes et al., 1993).

My first leader in an organizational situation had all five sources of power, yet only used expert, referent, and legitimate power. This leader used rational persuasion, inspirational appeals, and consultation as influence tactics. My first employer always looked to improve the team dynamic through the development of valued and trusting relationships. He always maintained a friendly working environment, expressed the importance of building homes correctly and safely. Goal accomplishment always entailed a logical description of why something was built a certain way. Followers with a developed understanding of construction principles and codes were consulted for trouble shooting when proposed plans were not possible. I was proud to be part of that team and I looked forward to working with this leader. My performance levels increased and I was willing to put forth extra effort for this leader. This leader took the time to personally understand, relate, and develop my abilities. Power was based in positive relationships and influence tactics implemented by this leader built-up followers, not tear them down or use pressure to influence. Thus my effectiveness as a follower increased through motivation, satisfaction, and performance increase.

While in the military my chief petty officers sources of power were coercive, legitimate, and expert. This chief petty officer had formal authority because of his position and had the ability to control others through fear and loss. The chief petty officer also had as a source of power, knowledge, though he did not use his expert power to influence followers. I am not stating that these sources of power are indicative of all military leaders, simple this particular chief petty officer. Pressure tactics were commonly implemented to influence. The possibility of the loss of rank and the coinciding drop in pay grade were consistently mentioned and served as reminders of the consequences of not fulfilling ones responsibilities adequately. My performance level never increased under this chief, nor was I satisfied because I did not feel personal motivation to accomplish goals. Only through the fear of reprisal were goals accomplished with this leader. If this chief petty officer attempted to develop referent power or even use his expert power, my effectiveness would have increased. Research has also demonstrated that the use of expert power contributes to follower motivation, satisfaction, and performance (Yukl, 1989).

In conclusion, the best source or base of power is referent or expert power. Leaders with referent or expert power implement influence tactics that build-up followers. The relationship prevalent in referent power contributes to follower effectiveness through follower motivation, satisfaction, and performance (Yukl, 1989). The research discussed and the supportive personal example serve as a reminder of the benefits obtained through developing leader/follower relationships, even though this process can be time consuming, followers are more effective  (Hughes et al., 1993). The use of referent power can contribute to the tendency to be influenced by leader/follower relationships. This servers as an additional important reminder, a leader must not forget their responsibility to the obtainment of a goal when using referent power.

 

References:

French, J. R. P., & Raven, B. H. (1959). The bases of social power, w: The Studies on Social Power (Doctoral dissertation, ed.) D. Cartwright, Ann Arbor, Michigan).

Hughes, R. L., Ginnett, R. C., & Curphy, G. J. (1993). Power and Influence. Leadership: Enhancing the lessons of experience. Homewood, IL: Richard D. Irwin. Ch. 5. Pp. 107-131.

Northouse, P.G. (2016).  Leadership: Theory and Practice. Los Angeles: Sage Publications.

Yukl, G. A. (1989). Leadership in organizations (2nd ed.). Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, N.J

Yukl, G., Lepsinger, R., & Lucia, T. (1992). Preliminary report on the development and validation of the influence behavior questionnaire. Impact of leadership, 417-427.

 

Adaptive Leaders are Effective Leaders – A Situational Approach to Leadership

by

In my experience, a situational approach to leadership greatly contributes to leadership effectiveness. I am not stating that a situational approach to leadership is the sole contributing factor to leadership effectiveness. Simply that the application of a situational approach to leadership is beneficial to leadership effectiveness. The situational approach contributes to leadership effectiveness through a leader’s ability to be adaptive or flexible with their leadership style. Adaptive leaders are effective leaders.

The situational approach was developed from the life-cycle theory of leadership by (Hersey & Blanchard, 1969). The situational approach was again refined by (Blanchard, 1985). At the time of its conceptualization it was one of the first leadership perspectives, along with contingency theory, to consider contextual factors on leadership effectiveness (Blanchard, 1985). Until this point in leadership research, research included the trait approach, skills approach, and behavioral approach. Leadership effectiveness was assessed through the qualities, skills, and actions of a leader that contribute to leadership effectiveness (Northouse, 2016). The situational approach contributes to leadership effectiveness through implementing various leadership styles based on follower competencies and commitment (Northouse, 2016). Effective leaders understand follower needs and adapt their leadership to those needs to facilitate effective goal accomplishment (Northouse, 2016).

The dynamics of the situational approach are based in two constructs; leadership style and follower development level (Northouse, 2016). Each of the leadership styles described in this approach, consist of vary degrees of directive and supportive behaviors. Directive behaviors involve clarifying and defining roles. Defining the goal, how the goal should be accomplished, and who is responsible for specific tasks (Northouse, 2016). Supportive behaviors represent social and emotional support. Listening, praising, providing feedback, asking for input, and personally sharing (Northouse, 2016). The situational approach to leadership conceptualizes four leadership styles. Directing style (S1) consists of high directive behaviors and low supportive behaviors (Blanchard, 1985). Coaching style (S2) involves high directive behaviors and high supportive behaviors (Blanchard, 1985). Supporting style (S3) involves high supportive behaviors and low directive behaviors (Blanchard, 1985). Delegating style (S4) involves low supportive behaviors and low directive behaviors (Blanchard, 1985). A leader then implements a particular leadership style based on follower development level, which is determined with follower levels of competency and commitment. The idea being that followers vary in ability and motivation and a leader must adapt their style to provide followers with what they need to succeed so that goal accomplishment is more effective. Competency represents the competency in skills necessary to effectively accomplish a goal (Northouse, 2016). Commitment represents the attitude toward accomplishing a specific goal (Northouse, 2016). The situational approach to leadership conceptualizes four development levels. Development level one (D1) consists of low competence and high commitment (Blanchard, 1985). Development level two (D2) consists of low to some competence and low commitment (Blanchard, 1985). Development level three (D3) consists of moderate to high competence and variable commitment (Blanchard, 1985). Development level four (D4) consists of high competence and high commitment (Blanchard, 1985). If a follower or group of followers is considered D1 then an S1 leadership style is most appropriate. If followers are representative of D2 then apply leadership S2 is best. Apply S3 leadership for D3 followers and with D4 followers, implement S4 leadership.

While in the U.S. Navy I was responsible for small boat operations. The members of my team frequently changed as new members arrived. My leadership style varied with each team member. New team members required a more directive leadership style that developed their competencies. By providing new team members with the abilities required of their position, they were more effective and goal accomplishment as a team was more effective. My predecessor implemented a single inflexible leadership style that did not provide new team members with a leadership style necessary to develop follower competencies. Abilities were developed through observing other team members. Goal accomplishment was haphazard at best and not effective until enough time had passed to discern and develop required abilities. This is just one man providing support for leadership effectiveness through the implementation of a situational approach to leadership. One man you have never heard of, how about some supportive evidence from a couple of people you probably know. The UCLA basketball team coach John Wooden is known for implementing an adaptive leadership style with the members of his team. By 1974 John Wooden won seven consecutive NCAA basketball championships and had an 88 game winning streak (Spahr, 2015). Dwight Eisenhower is known for his implementation of a situational approach to leadership (Spahr, 2015). Eisenhower was effective as the president, commander of allied forces, and as a statesmen because he implemented a different leadership styles in each situation (Spahr, 2015).

Criticisms have been raised regarding the situational approach to leadership. Not enough research has been conducted to empirically support the theoretical approach proposed by the situational approach (Yukl, 1989). Another major criticism concerns the lack of explanation provided by the approach developers regarding how competencies and commitment combine to form the four development constructs (Yukl, 1989). However; the same research that criticizes components of the situational approach, also supports a component. The ability to adapt leadership styles based on current goals and followers’ needs contributes to effective leadership (Yukl, 1989).

In conclusion; the implementation of a situational approach to leadership contributes to leadership effectiveness. My experience as a leader provides supports for this, as does the implementation by Eisenhower and Wooden. Research on the implementation of a situational approach provides support for this claim though not the conceptualization of the approach in its entirety. 400 of the fortune 500 companies have implemented a situational approach to training programs (Northouse, 2016). This support serves as an important reminder that effective leaders are among many things, adaptive and flexible leaders. A good leader adapts to situations, has an understanding of follower competencies and attitudes, and implements a leadership style that effectively supports and influences those competencies to effectively accomplish goals. Adapting ones leadership style to followers’ competencies, provides the individualized consideration required to effectively lead, develop, and influence any team. Adaptive leaders are effective leaders.

 

References:

Blanchard, K. H. (1985). A situational approach to managing people. Blanchard Training and Development.

Hersey, P., & Blanchard, K. H. (1969). Management of organizational behavior: Utilizing human resources. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Northouse, P.G. (2016).  Leadership: Theory and Practice. Los Angeles: Sage Publications.

Spahr, P. (2015). What is Situational Leadership? How Flexibility Leads to Success. The University of St. Thomas. Minneapolis, MN: Online. Retrieved from http://online.stu.edu/situational-leadership/

Yukl, G. (1989). Leadership in organizations, second edition. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

 

Parenting Style and the Emergence of Effective Leadership

by

There are many perspectives or approaches implemented to the study and development of leadership. One particular perspective is the psychodynamic approach to leadership. The foundation of the psychodynamic approach is based in Sigmund Freud’s psychoanalytical theories of human behavior. The psychodynamic approach applies the clinical paradigm to the study of leadership (Kets de Vries, 2006). The clinical paradigm is comprised of four basic premises. Premise one; there is a rationale explanation for every human action (Kets de Vries, 2006). Premise two; many of our thoughts, feelings, and motives lie outside our conscious awareness (Kets de Vries, 2006). Premise three; the way a person expresses and regulates emotion is most central to whom a person is (Kets de Vries, 2006). Premise four; we are all products of our past experiences (Kets de Vries, 2006). Thus; our past experiences and relationship themes with people; contribute to the development of behavioral response patterns during childhood. Over time behavioral consistencies will develop, rooted in our wishes, needs, and goals; our personality style (Northouse, 2016). We then unconsciously carry those dynamics that influence an individual’s behaviors into adulthood; and those behavioral dynamics will have an effect on our interactions with other people (Northouse, 2016).

Three concepts or ideas have emerged in the study of leadership through the application of the clinical paradigm to a psychodynamic approach (Northouse, 2016). Focus on the inner theatre; an individual’s past experiences in life contribute to dynamics that surround personal behavior and our personality style (Northouse, 2016). Focus on leader-follower relationships; An individual’s behavioral dynamics will affect an individual’s behavior, and how others perceive and behave toward that individual (Northouse, 2016). Focus on the shadow side of leadership; narcissism ranges from self-interest to pathological self-absorption; it provides a leader their conviction regarding the righteousness of a cause, it is either constructive or reactive (Northouse, 2016). Constructive narcissism; well balanced, positive vitality, empathetic outlook, and a capacity for introspection (Kets de Vries, Engellau, Shakespeare, Freud, Jung, & Gide, 2010). Reactive narcissism; Self-grandiosity, sense of entitlement, lack empathy, a disregard for rules and regulations (Kets de Vries et al., 2010). An individual’s particular type of narcissism is representative of the behavioral dynamics an individual acquires through childhood experiences and relationship themes.

This denotes that the behavioral dynamics of an individual’s childhood caregiver and relationship themes are a major contributing factor to developing constructive narcissism and leadership effectiveness. “When we trace narcissism to its roots; we return to a person’s infancy” (Kets de Vries et al., 2010). Adults who demonstrate constructive narcissism have consistent childhood caregivers who equally provide support and autonomy (Northouse, 2016). Caregivers who provide appropriate challenges, but do not overwhelm (Kets de Vries et al., 2010). Adults who demonstrate reactive narcissism have inconsistent childhood caregivers who are either over on under supportive or consistent caregivers who provide no autonomy (Kets de Vries et al., 2010). Caregivers that provide inconsistent stimulation, over stimulate, or under stimulate (Northouse, 2016).

Leadership research has determined the particular parenting style that contributes to a child developing constructive narcissism and leadership effectiveness. There are three types of parenting style; (Williams-Washington, Melon, & Blau, 2009). Authoritarian style is; assertive, intrusive, and restrictive (Murphy, & Johnson, 2011). Caregivers implementing an authoritarian style demand control and expect respect and compliance (Williams-Washington et al., 2009). Permissive, neglectful style is; nonassertive, nonintrusive, and nonrestrictive (Murphy, & Johnson, 2011). Caregivers implementing a permissive neglectful style exercise minimal control and are minimally supportive (Williams-Washington et al., 2009). Permissive, indulgent style is; nonassertive, intrusive, and nonrestrictive (Murphy, & Johnson, 2011). Caregivers implementing permissive indulgent style exercise minimal control and are very supportive (Williams-Washington et al., 2009). Authoritative style is; assertive, but not intrusive or restrictive (Murphy, & Johnson, 2011). Caregivers implementing an authoritative style exercise control and a balance of support and autonomy (Williams-Washington et al., 2009). Children with caregivers applying an authoritative style have the best chance to emerge as leaders and to be effective leaders (Murphy, & Johnson, 2011). Children with caregivers applying an authoritative style are more socially competent, demonstrate self-control, and are self-reliant (Murphy, & Johnson, 2011). Caregivers who implement an authoritative style assist children in adequately resolving the narcissism tension between helplessness and the grandiose sense of self found in all children (Kets de Vries et al., 2010).

 

References:

Kets de Vries, M. F. (2006). The leader on the couch: A clinical approach to changing people and organizations. NY: John Wiley & Sons.

Kets de Vries, M., Engellau, E., Shakespeare, W., Freud, S., Jung, C., & Gide, A. (2010, January). A clinical approach to the dynamics of leadership and executive transformation. In The Handbook of Leadership Theory and Practice: An HBS Centennial Colloquium on Advancing Leadership (pp. 183-238).

Murphy, S. E., & Johnson, S. K. (2011). The benefits of a long-lens approach to leader development: Understanding the seeds of leadership. The Leadership Quarterly, 22(3), 459–470.

Northouse, P.G. (2016).  Leadership: Theory and Practice. Los Angeles: Sage Publications.

Williams-Washington, K., Melon, J., & Blau, G. M. (2009). Childhood growth and development within a family context.  PsycCritiques, 54(10), 21-39.

Skip to toolbar