Leadership

PSYCH 485 blog

Gender Differences in Leadership Skills

by

Although women are seen less often in positions of leadership, both genders are found in some positions of leadership in many different career areas. For example, we see Kamala Harris as a perfectly competent female Vice President of the United States. Another great example would be the amazing Ruth Bader Ginsburg, a former Associate Justice of the Supreme Court. Likewise, we have seen some very motivated male leaders in the past years. Two great examples are Barack Obama, the 44th United States President, and Bill Gates, co-founder of Microsoft. According to Northouse (2019), men and women both hold specific leadership qualities that make each of them unique leaders in the workplace. These leadership qualities can be seen in different ways when comparing each of the above individuals as well. 

Women have different qualities than men when it comes to being leaders. Based on an article published by the University of Pennsylvania (2005), women tend to be more aware of their abilities as leaders and what they should be doing in their position if they want to make an impact on their followers. Women are often viewed as being very empathetic leaders (University of Pennsylvania, 2005). They have also been described as being emotional, strong, intuitive, compassionate, determined, verbal, consensus-building, collaborative, and multi-tasking (University of Pennsylvania, 2005). According to a post on Womenscode.com, women are seen as being weak or ‘inefficient’, but their leadership styles have proven to be the most effective (BalanceGirl, 2018). Women lead in a more inclusive way that is based solely on consensus rather than the dictation of rules (BalanceGirl, 2018). Female leaders also tend to focus on teaching others how to problem-solve and work as a team, and companies who hire females for leadership positions outperform male teams by up to 66 percent (BalanceGirl, 2018). It has also been determined that female leadership styles are better suited for the world today and the outlook on women as leaders has begun to transform into a more positive one (BalanceGirl, 2018). 

 

Just like women, men hold different leadership qualities that are distinct from females. Words that are associated with male leadership styles include strong, arrogant, intelligent, ego-driven, powerful, dominant, and assertive (University of Pennsylvania, 2005). Men are far more task-oriented, focusing their attention on detail in the moment rather than in the future or the past to lead their followers more effectively (University of Pennsylvania, 2005). Additionally, men are more likely to be more confident leaders and take more risks (University of Pennsylvania, 2005). Although men can be seen as more intelligent leaders, they tend to be more disorganized than female leaders, but they seem to do better in disorganized situations when compared to women (University of Pennsylvania, 2005). For example, in a situation where a male leader has to do a presentation at work that he has not come prepared for due to unforeseen obstacles, the same male leader would be expected to accomplish the task with ease compared to his female counterpart. 

 

Overall, It is important to remember that both women and men in leadership positions are not any better than the other. Our world today is evolving to consider both genders to be effective leaders and women are now being seen as assets to companies and organizations everywhere. Both genders share qualities that are better in different situations, but demonstrating these very different qualities can be very useful when leading a business, a team, or even a classroom. 

REFERENCES: 

BalanceGirl. (2018, June 13). Difference Between Male and Female Leadership Qualities. The Women’s Code. https://thewomenscode.com/female-leadership-qualities/. 

Northouse, P. G. (2019). Chapter 15 Gender and Leadership. In LEADERSHIP: Theory and Practice (8th ed., pp. 403-425). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE PUBLICATIONS.

University of Pennsylvania. (2005, October 5). The ‘Masculine’ and ‘Feminine’ Sides of Leadership and Culture: Perception vs. Reality. Knowledge@Wharton. https://knowledge.wharton.upenn.edu/article/the-masculine-and-feminine-sides-of-leadership-and-culture-perception-vs-reality/.

The Truth About Authentic Leaders

by

This week’s lesson highlighted the importance of authentic leadership and defined what it means to be an authentic leader. I was very intrigued by authentic leadership because it is a style of leadership that I am not very familiar with, especially because there is not a lot of evidence for its effectiveness. According to the lesson, authentic leadership was considered a maxim for the longest time until certain situations forced research to prove its worthiness as a leadership theory (Hamel, 2021). Authentic leadership is defined in three parts: interpersonal, intrapersonal, and developmental. ‘Interpersonal’ describes the portion of authentic leadership that focuses on having and maintaining strong and honest relationships between leaders and followers (Hamel, 2021). ‘Intrapersonal’ describes the internal thought processes of the leader and includes the leader’s self-knowledge, regulation of behavior, and confidence in being themselves (Hamel, 2021). ‘Developmental’ is the last way to describe authentic leadership. It means that authentic leadership can be learned, improved upon, and maintained (Hamel, 2021). The developmental definition of authentic leadership is the most widely accepted depiction of the theory and it combines the interpersonal and intrapersonal definitions as well by explaining how certain life events might cause a person to make some adjustments, thus bringing out their authentic leadership abilities (Hamel, 2021). 

 

Authentic leadership is said to be effective, however, there is no right or wrong way to use this theory. According to Terry’s (1993) wheel of authentic leadership, one should look at breaking points in a given leadership situation or environment that can be corrected to allow for authentic leadership to occur (Hamel, 2021). George’s (2003) approach explains how leaders can improve their authentic leadership abilities by using five dimensions: 

  • Purpose 
  • Values
  • Relationships
  • Self-discipline
  • Heart 

Lastly, the theoretical approach states that leaders should have a combination of the right experiences and positive attributes that lead to the presence of four key components: 

  • Self-awareness
  • Internalized moral perspective
  • Balanced processing
  • Relational transparency 

 

All of this information in regards to the authentic leadership theory can be quite useful, however, it poses the question “Is being yourself really beneficial advice for a leader?”. According to a Harvard post by Bill George, several critics have put forth convincing evidence that authentic leadership is not as useful as it might seem. Jeff Pfeffer says that in crucial times and during periods of stressful decision-making, the last thing leaders should be is ‘authentic’ (George, 2016). In other words, leaders need to “fake it til they make it” if they want to be successful and if they are having a difficult day, they should never make it known to their followers as this could negatively impact job performance. Leaders can utilize several of the following steps to develop of better understanding of themselves and what it really means to be an authentic leader:

  • Explore their past and make connections to their personal experiences
  • Take the time to reflect
  • Seek honest feedback from colleagues 
  • Understand their job and purpose as a leader
  • Learn how to create and maintain an effective leadership style specific to their audience

Authentic leadership theory should not place as much value on the “being your authentic self” portion of the theory but rather taking into consideration the thoughts and feelings of others while using your own unique talents and positive personality traits to further one’s success (George, 2016). In other words, authentic leaders should be careful to monitor the appropriateness of their speech, behavior, and body language in the workplace and should be in touch with their colleagues to ensure that their team is engaged at all times (George, 2016).

Closing the “In” and “Out” Gap

by

According to this week’s lesson, the Leader-Member Exchange Theory (LMX) is a theory used to describe the interactions between leaders and followers as well as the relationships that often form as a result (Leader-Member Exchange Theory, Lesson 8). The LMX Theory explains these leader-member interactions through two existing relationships: in-groups and out-groups (Introduction to Leader-Member Exchange Theory, Lesson 8). In-groups are those groups that consist of employees who go beyond the requirements listed in their employment contract (Introduction to Leader-Member Exchange Theory, Lesson 8). These individuals’ jobs are based on both negotiated and “extra-role” responsibilities, which might also be referred to as organizational citizenship behaviors (OCBs) (Introduction to Leader-Member Exchange Theory, Lesson 8). In comparison, out-groups describe those employees who do not venture outside of the tasks and responsibilities that are expected of them (Introduction to Leader-Member Exchange Theory, Lesson 8). Each member in an organization is typically categorized into one of these two groups. 

 

It is inevitable that many businesses and large-scale corporations fall into the trap of using in-groups and out-groups to categorize their organization’s members, however, new research has shown that these groups lead to favoritism and group bias, according to Michael Seitchik, Director of Research and Assessment for Bates Communications Inc. (Seitchik, 2019). The presence of these groups typically help motivate those who are in the in-group, but those in the out-group show consistently declining levels of productivity and motivation, and they often believe that compensation or further rewards are given in favor of those in the in-group (Seitchik, 2019). Constructive criticism is often not an option because many of the same individuals feel as if they are not being listened to, especially because they are a part of the ‘wrong’ group. This phenomena not only decreases company profit in the long-run but also hurts business reputation (Seitchik, 2019). Additionally, those members of the out-group who stand up for themselves and their fellow group members often come across to the other group as sensitive or overdramatic, and the in-group members almost always miss the fact that there is a problem with the dynamic at hand (Seitchik, 2019). 

 

Fortunately, there are some things that companies and large-scale organizations alike can do to narrow the gap between in-groups and out-groups. According to Seitchik (2019), one of the most effective ways to begin is to have the leader (i.e., manager, chief executive officer, etc.) construct a confidential list of individuals in the in-group and the out-group, taking note of each member’s personality traits and characteristics, both favorable and unfavorable (Seitchik, 2019). Leaders should also give their followers a chance to open up about any concerns they may have or make suggestions (Seitchik, 2019). Another way to give individuals a chance to feel like more of an equal is to take the time to periodically allow followers to get to know each other (Seitchik, 2019). Some ideas may include the following: 

 

  • Invite individuals to come forward with something positive that they accomplished during the work day. 
  • Take the time to acknowledge a job well done, despite whether or not an individual was required to complete the task or not. 
  • Have individuals share a hobby that is completely unrelated to their work.
  • Offer to mentor individuals by helping them create goal plans or improve a new skill. 

 

Because the presence of in-groups and out-groups can be very detrimental to maintaining a positive work environment, the effects of closing (or at least narrowing) this continually spreading gap could be very beneficial. In the absence of these divided groups, work teams would be able to openly discuss concerns and new ideas, make decisions collectively, and recognize the strengths of each individual to accomplish a common goal. 

 

RESOURCES: 

 

Hamel, R. (n.d.). Lesson 8: Leader-Member Exchange Theory (LMX), 2021

Seitchik, Michael. (2019, October 3). Overcoming In and Out Groups in Teams. Bales.

https://www.bates-communications.com/bates-blog/overcoming-in-and-out-groups-in-teams

Analyzing My Father’s Job as a CEO in Light of the Path-Goal Theory

by

     We first touched base on the Path-Goal Theory back in January with our brief discussion of leadership theories and approaches. The Path-Goal Theory is one of those approaches to leadership that I found to be quite interesting and worth reading about, however, I never got the chance to educate myself further on the topic. I chose to analyze the Path-Goal Theory and apply it to my father’s career as the CEO of his best friend’s company. 

     The Path-Goal Theory is an approach to leadership that focuses on the ways in which leaders motivate their subordinates to accomplish a common goal (Introduction to Path-Goal Theory, Lesson 6). The theory says that when employees are consistently motivated to do well and their accomplishments are recognized, they are more likely to have above average attendance rates and performance (Northouse, 2019). In addition to rewarding their employees and encouraging hard work, leaders who utilize the Path-Goal Theory need to also keep in mind the work environment and ensure that their employees have all of the necessary resources to do their assigned tasks with ease (Introduction to Path-Goal Theory, Lesson 6). 

     Now that we have an idea of what the Path-Goal Theory is in general, it is important to note that the Path-Goal Theory consists of four different components to help guide leaders who fall under this category of leadership (Leader Behaviors, Lesson 6). These four components are leadership behaviors that these same leaders should be utilizing: 

 

1. Directive Leadership

2. Supportive Leadership

3. Participative Leadership

4. Achievement-Oriented Leadership 

     My father’s leadership style can definitely be considered a product of the Path-Goal Theory. This is because his work ethic and his ability to effectively lead and manage the company he works for all fall under the four components of the Path-Goal Theory. To provide you with some background information, my father is the CEO of his best friend’s land-clearing company. Their business is really an overall jack-of-all-trades because they do many differing tasks. Their main service is clearing land from trees and other greenery to build homes, clean up after a storm, or improve the appearance of personal properties. They have recently started a new contract with Homeland Security’s natural disaster branch, the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). This means that during natural disasters (mainly after the storm or flood has ceased), my father’s company is responsible for sending employees to clean up fallen trees and brush from the area. My father spent a few months in Tennessee a few years ago overseeing the clean up after one of the storms they experienced. The company also has a smaller branch of profit that dedicates their time and energy to snow removal. They have done work for large companies such as Amazon and Target, as well as for government offices. Because this job can get a bit stressful and unpredictable, my father has to be sure that his approach to leadership is helpful to both himself and his followers. For this reason, his leadership styles change from situation to situation and from follower to follower. 

     To ensure that his employees are satisfied with their jobs, he uses directive leadership. This form of leadership categorizes leaders as being authoritative but careful. My father is very good at communicating with his employees and this is very important and is often seen as a positive leadership characteristic by most of his subordinates. My father has a very effective way of telling his employees exactly what he wants to be completed, how he wants the tasks completed, and when those tasks should be completed by. He often sets very clear goal standards for his employees and then expects that they will be mature and independent enough to complete their tasks on their own. This helps his followers feel as if they are being treated like adults and are, therefore, much more likely to have high performance levels. 

     Although my father is a bit strict when it comes to his communication tactics, he definitely utilizes supportive leadership. As a supportive leader, he has made it clear to his employees that he is still approachable and is always willing to help his employees learn how they can be better on the job. Since the job that they have can be quite unsafe at times, my father believes that taking the time to fully train and help out his employees at any given time is important and is a great way to reduce the number of job-related accidents or injuries. 

     My father uses participative leadership in many situations when on the job. The type of job that my father has (as CEO of a company!) normally requires leaders to be very strict and authoritative to ensure that the company is being run properly. In my father’s case, he likes to include all of his followers in the decision-making, and the industry that he works in makes this much easier than if he worked for a company like Google, which is important to take into consideration. Nonetheless, my father prioritizes the thoughts and opinions of all his subordinates and is always willing to hear all the sides to every story and every opinion before buying new machinery, making changes to company policies, or even what color to paint the new office’s walls. 

     Finally, my father enjoys incorporating achievement-oriented leadership into his daily agenda because it allows him to ensure that his employees are putting forth the same consistent effort day-to-day while also making it a priority to motivate and encourage his employees to do well, especially the new members to his team. My father enjoys working closely one-on-one with each of his team members from the moment they step one foot into his office for their first day on the job. This is his way of creating a work-related relationship with each of his employees, making it easier for him to gain their trust and instill in them the skills they will need to do the job correctly. The relationships that my father has created in the workplace gives him the confidence that they will always work to the best of their ability at any given point in time. 

     In conclusion, my father is an obvious exhibitor of the Path-Goal Leadership Theory. He utilizes all of the components of the theory to guide his leadership role at his company. His consistent use of these four components has helped him grow and expand the company while also making sure that his subordinates approve and are satisfied with their day-to-day requirements. For this reason, his leadership styles change from situation to situation and from follower to follower, making his leadership style a fully-detailed blueprint for the Path-Goal Theory. 

 

Hamel, R. (2021). Lesson 6: Contingency & Path-Goal Theories

 

Northouse, P.G. (2019).  Leadership: Theory and Practice.  Los Angeles: Sage Publications. 

 

Parents as Leaders

by

Leaders are everywhere. They are in businesses, in hospitals, and doctors’ offices. They have jobs at high schools and universities. They even take care of animals and dedicate their lives to helping others. Likewise, our parents are leaders and the dynamic is not that much different. From the moment we are born, our parents make a very important choice to raise and protect us. They share a common goal for us and make it their responsibility and number one priority. Although parents share this same goal, they often have two very different parenting styles which has a lot to do with how their children view them as leaders. 

 

I grew up in a bit of a divided family. My mother and father had very different parental leadership styles and their household relationship caused a gendered environment. This definitely contributed to the division that we experienced. My mother was the caretaker of the family, but not only of the children. She also took care of the laundry, the dishes, and anything my father needed help with. This included making his coffee and packing his lunch before work. She always made sure that everything was to his liking. Judging by my mother’s personality and need to care for others as well as the gentle way that she raised us, I would say that she utilized servant leadership quite obviously. Servant leadership is an approach that describes the leadership process as being more so about the followers than the leader (Looking at Leadership Through Many Lenses, Lesson 1).  My mom’s parental style embodies this form of leadership because she always puts the needs of her followers (in this case, myself and my brother and sometimes my father) before her own. She prioritizes her followers’ opinions to help encompass her idea of leadership and how she can best serve her children and husband. 

 

In comparison, my father has always been the sole “bread-winner” in the family. He never spent much time at home helping my mother raise my brother and I, and he was definitely not the laundry type. His sole idea of leadership is very similar to the styles and skills approach as well as the psychodynamic approach. The styles and skills approach describes leadership as having an “emphasis on the behavior of the leader” and a desire to improve (Looking at Leadership Through Many Lenses, Lesson 1). The psychodynamic approach states that leaders who understand their psychological characteristics and those of their followers are more likely to be successful (Looking at Leadership Through Many Lenses, Lesson 1). To clarify, my father was very involved in his career and he always wanted to be the best that he could be in order to provide for his family. Therefore, he believed that it was always possible for him to improve and his belief in hard work is what contributed to his support of the styles and skills approach. Likewise, my father’s parental leadership styles embodied the psychodynamic approach because he was very in tune with the emotions and psychological makeup of others. This made him a great negotiator but he was also very understanding of others, including his children. His use of the psychodynamic approach allowed him to understand the minds of his children and how he could instill in them the qualities needed to fulfill a prosperous life. 

 

In conclusion, our parents are the first individuals to expose us to the many different forms of leadership. Just as a manager might interact with their subordinates, our parents helped us set and accomplish goals, understand right from wrong, comprehend new ideas, and learn the necessary skills to have successful futures. It is obvious that many parents are also active leaders in our schools, communities, and extracurriculars as coaches, mentors, tutors, and our biggest fans, but they leave the most impact on our lives when they are there for us, teaching us how to be the best we can be. They may not always be perfect, but their commitment to our development makes them some of the most influential leaders in our lives, for the worst and for the better.

REFERENCES

Hamel, R. (n.d.). Lesson 1: Introduction to Leadership, 2021

Skip to toolbar