Leadership

PSYCH 485 blog

Construction: Ethics at Work

by

         The possible ethical pitfalls are plentiful in an industry that already has a reputation for a less than perfect reputation.  The issue begins in an underlying ethical egoism to win contracts.  This means that competitors (contractors) have a high level of self-interest and a low level of concern for the interests of others. (Northouse, 2013)  This is inherent due to a very competitive process in acquiring contracts to build projects.   Most often it results in a low bid scenario where the lowest price offered wins the contract and that opens the door for “cheating” through techniques like bid shopping. 

 

         The evaluation of an ethical dilemma with respect to its end result is known as a teleological approach. (Northouse, 2013) Many times this is the only way to evaluate these situations.  Another perspective is through a value-based theory which looks at the leader’s character more than their individual actions.  This is difficult in construction due to the uniqueness of many situations and the vast presence of grey-areas.  Just because I wouldn’t cheat in a game of cards does not necessarily mean that I would know whether or not to accept a gift basket or football tickets from a sub-contractor trying to win an upcoming job.

 

         Of the five principles for ethical leadership, a construction manager must keep respect for others and justice close at all times.  With respecting others “Persons must be treated as having their own… goals and never treated as a means to another’s personal goals.” (Beauchamp, 1988)  This goes a long way in construction because it points out directly the conflict in bid shopping.  For example a sub-contractor might be so motivated to get a job that they call the general contractor and ask what price the current winner is bidding so they can come in under it.  If the general contractor caves in and reveals this information they are using both sub-contractors to achieve a smaller budget instead of respecting the goals of the first subcontractor who was currently, fairly winning.  This situation is also very closely tied to ideals of fair play and justice.

 

Beauchamp, T.L., & Bowie, N.E., (1988) Ethical Theory and Business (3rd Ed.). Englewood       Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

 

Northouse, P. G. (2013). Leadership: Theory and Practice (6th edition). Thousand Oaks, California:     Sage Publications.

LMX and The Office

by

           Leader Member Exchange is another interaction based theory of leadership.  In general, people in an organization are split between “in” and “out” groups.  The in-group members are well liked by leader and generally put forth extra effort to perform well.  In contrast, the out-group do not interact well with the leader and typically show up at the start of the day and leave at the end of the day and put forth only enough effort to get by (Northouse, 2013).  This theory makes a lot of sense, albeit, somewhat of an immature lens to view group interactions.  It creates a perfect opportunity to turn to a primetime comedy television show to find examples of how the leader member exchange plays out in the work place.

                In the hit show “The Office” a variety of dramatic personalities work alongside each other at a paper company.  With Michael Scott serving as the fearless leader of the group the LMX theory can be seen in who interacts well with him as opposed to who is deemed more of an outcast.  It is surprising to see such parallels in even fictitious group environments.  The phase 3 members of an organization are those that are well trusted and respected by the leader and leaders have formed partnerships with these individuals (Northouse, 2013).  In the case of Dunder Mifflin, Jim Helpert and Dwight Schrute represent these phase 3 individuals.  Michael Scott frequently confides in them with both professional and personal matters more than any other individuals in the office.  Given Dwight’s infamous hard work ethic and determination, Michael Scott has even referred to Dwight as his second in command and relied on him frequently throughout his time in the organization.

                Phase 1 individuals are at the other end of the spectrum entirely.  These group members are considered strangers to the leader and have low quality interactions that are formal and one way in nature.  These individuals tend not to stay in a work setting longer than is necessary and generally have other sources of social or intellectual fulfillment outside of work (Northouse, 2013).  The two shining examples from The Office are Toby and Stanley.  Stanley is notorious for leaving work at exactly 5 o’clock everyday regardless of the situation.  He has very limited interaction with the leader (Michael) and finds very little fulfillment in the work place.  Likewise, Toby has been put in the “out-group” as a result of previous actions he took against Michael.  As a result of the subsequent social “out casting”, Toby rarely presents new ideas or engages in productive discussion.  I found it very remarkable to see these indications of LMX in a fictitious setting but maybe there is a lot to learn from an exaggerated example like The Office.

Reference

Northouse, P. G. (2013). Leadership: Theory and practice. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications, Inc.

Leadership Training from Teachings of The Wizard of Westwood

by

wooden pyramid.jpg

          Just like almost every other kid in America I’ve also had to opportunity to get involved in a number of organizations in both high school and college.  These have included the Boy Scouts of America, a fraternity in college, Penn State’s Dance Marathon, and Campus Crusade for Christ.  The one thing all of these organizations have in common is that they seek to turn ambitious kids into leaders.  While this isn’t their primary purpose for existence, it’s crucial to the success of the individual organizations.  Many times this leadership training involved going away to a camp or a seminar to be “taught” how to lead.  This notion that a person can learn what they need to know to lead is known as the skills approach to leadership (Northouse, 2013).

                The Wooden Institute is a 4 day long leadership conference organized by the Beta Theta Pi Fraternity.  The skills that are presented at this retreat are based on the theories of the late John Wooden (nicknamed the Wizard of Westwood), former head coach of the UCLA Men’s Basketball Team.  One point to be made regarding interpreting the lessons of John Wooden is that while his lessons in success and leadership were life lessons, he used basketball as his canvas.  The word “skill” in his “pyramid of success” refers to the natural athletic ability of a player (more like the trait approach to leadership).  In either case, John taught all of these building blocks to his players (Biro, 2001).  At the Wooden Institute these lessons were passed onto us in preparation for future leadership roles in our organization. 

These skills of self-control, friendship, team spirit, and the rest are at the conceptual level of the three skill approach designed by Robert Katz.  These types of skills are more necessary at the middle and upper levels of leadership where more of a directional vision is required (Northouse, 2013).  This probably indicates that the fraternity expected the people attending this conference to become very successful, higher level leaders either in their individual fraternity chapters or later in their careers.  Building up strong leaders is important for every organization especially one like a fraternity in which nearly every day to day decision is made by the undergraduate members.  Using my past leadership role as a THON chair I can recall numerous times when I used the lessons learned on this long weekend to get the group together and on the same page.  I believe that the skills approach to leadership is a very valuable and useful tool for organizations to use in ensuring proper preparation for leadership.  In my opinion many aspects of leadership can be taught.

Biro, B. (2001). Beyond success: The 15 secrets to effective leadership and life based on the legendary coach john wooden’s pyramid of success. Penguin Publishers.

Northouse, P. G. (2013). Leadership: Theory and Practice (6th edition). Thousand Oaks, California: Sage Publications.

MBTI, DiSC, and the Workplace

by

Many employers are looking to the psychodynamic approach to aide them in talent hunting.  I recently interviewed with a construction company who administered both the Myers Briggs type indicator (MBTI) and DiSC tests prior to meeting with prospective employees.  What are the advantages to using these tests in the workplace and how are the results used?  Of course my first fear was that if I didn’t obtain a certain personality result, my application would be thrown out of consideration.  I now realize that some of these results have many more uses than just describing an individual.  The results can help employers build effective teams most importantly, help individuals understand themselves and acknowledge their strengths and weaknesses.

                An important part of leadership is how leaders and followers interact.  Knowing the tendencies of followers can go a long way in the performance of leaders in the work place.  The result of properly using the information obtained through personality assessments comes in the way of avoiding complications resulting from clashing personalities.  Take the example of an extroverted leader working with an introverted follower.  This situation could result in the leader dominating conversation and assuming the follower is in agreement while in reality the follower was simply thinking over the situation and formulating a response in their own head (Northouse, 2013).  This friction can result from a variety of leader-follower personality combinations.  Knowing the tendencies of individuals can help by organizing teams with individuals that will work well together.  Since balance is important and clashing individuals are bound to be working together, knowing each other’s tendencies can help tremendously in navigating through tough disagreements and interactions.

                Possibly the most beneficial result from my own personal experience taking the MBTI and DiSC assessments is obtaining a personal awareness of tendencies.  At the bottom of the results for my DiSC assessment there is a disclaimer that states “There is no good or bad pattern. Research indicates that the most successful individuals are those who know themselves and develop strategies to meet the needs of specific situations” (North Group Consultants, 2012).  The results indicate that I may increase my effectiveness by adapting better to change, looking for shortcuts to improve productivity, and learning to be more assertive.  Knowing this, I will be able to work on these areas and hopefully be a better asset in my future position. 

                In conclusion, the psychodynamic approach to leadership may be useful in the work place if used the right way.  Companies should not exclude individuals base on their personalities but instead, embrace diversity and adjust the handling of certain situations to best accommodate individual strengths and weaknesses.  In addition, individuals can benefit greatly from psychodynamic assessments by using the results to introspectively work on weaknesses and adapt work environments to embrace strengths.  Leadership can be best served by the psychodynamic approach by equipping leaders with knowledge and understanding of themselves and the people around them.

 

North Group Consultants (2012). Personalized Description and Success Strategies.  Lancaster, Pennsylvania: Inscape Publishing

 

Northouse, P. G. (2013). Leadership: Theory and Practice (6th edition). Thousand Oaks, California: Sage Publications.

Integrity: The “Deal-Breaking Trait”

by

         Over the last century researchers have sought to define the traits that make an ordinary person into a leader.  While studies have listed out traits like intelligence, sociability, and even masculinity over the years (Northouse, 2013), it wasn’t until 1991 that Shelley Kirkpatrick and Edwin Locke first mentioned the most critical trait of them all to our current society; integrity (Kirkpatrick, 1991).  Integrity is the most important trait of leadership in our society because regardless of what other beneficial characteristics exist, people will not follow someone unless they have established trust with them.  There are unfortunately many examples of poor integrity in our recent history.  In sports, for example, Lance Armstrong recently admitted to using banned substances in his 7 Tour de France victories.  In politics, the extramarital affair of General David Petraeus set the stage for the latest example of how integrity impacts government leadership.  These two real life examples demonstrate the importance of integrity in any list of leadership traits.

                On July 24, 2005 Lance Armstrong crossed the finished line first for the 7th consecutive time at the final stage of the Tour de France.   He did not win though because this victory was taken from him by the UCI after he was found guilty for using performance enhancing drugs during all of his Tour competitions.  Armstrong’s own organization, Livestrong, released a statement apologizing to the general public for his dishonesty and made it clear that “Lance is no longer on the Foundation’s board, but he is our founder and we will always be grateful to him”(Livestrong, 2013).  The fact that the organization is distancing themselves from their founder is proof that without integrity they don’t believe he can lead the organization forward.  Since Livestrong is a non-profit organization they probably also understand that the general public would be less likely to follow and give financially to an organization led by someone who they see as unethical. 

                When considering leadership, the most “textbook examples” come from the military.  General David Petraeus had a long history of service in the Army but his most recent position was as Director of the Central Intelligence Agency.  In the November of 2012, the FBI discovered emails that implicated Petraeus of having an extramarital affair.  Just two days following the discovery, David Petraeus resigned at the request of his superior (The Washington Post, 2012).  This sort of “scandal” is not rare on television reports in our current era.  In almost every case the unethical act is followed by a fall from grace and a revocation of leadership.  Leaders have a responsibility to maintain a trusting relationship with their followers because without that trust, people will simply not follow.

                In summary, integrity is the most important trait to our current society because people will only follow a person they trust.  This can be seen in the current events surrounding both Lance Armstrong and General David Petraeus.  These two situations are just isolated examples of the seemingly endless string of news reports involving scandal and betrayal in various groups across the country.  Since almost every story ends with the leader stepping down from their position it seems reasonable to think that trust is a very big deal when it comes to leadership.

 

References:

Kirkpatrick, S. A., & Locke, E. A. (1991). Leadership: Do traits matter? The Executive, 5, 48-60.

Livestrong. (2013). Official statement from the livestrong foundation.  Retrrieved Janurary 18, 2013, from http://blog.livestrong.org/2013/01/17/official-statement-from-the-livestrong-foundation-2/

Northouse, P. G. (2013). Leadership: Theory and Practice (6th edition). Thousand Oaks, California: Sage Publications.


The Washington Post.  FBI probe of Petraeus triggered by e-mail threats from biographer, officials say. (2012, Nov 10). Retrieved from http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/fbi-probe-of-petraeus-triggered-by-e-mail-threats-from-biographer-officials-say/2012/11/10/d2fc52de-2b68-11e2-bab2-eda299503684_story.html

Skip to toolbar