Leadership

PSYCH 485 blog

Justin Sardis – Psych 485 – Leadership & Diversity Blog Post

by

Justin Sardis

Psych 485

August 4th, 2015

Leadership & Diversity Blog Post

In most industries, the vast majority of leadership positions are held by men. Throughout history, women have done much to express this issue, but it has definitely taken quite some time for them to become leaders. Even though women have made some progress in attaining leadership roles, there is still a very large gap between the number of men who are C-level executives and the number of women who are C-level executives. For example, there have been 43 presidents of the United States, which were all men. Hilary Clinton has ran and is currently in the running to become the first female president of the United States. Another issue with diversity in regards to the previous United States presidents is that we didn’t have a president of a different race for 220 years, which changed when Barack Obama became the president of the United States in 2009. Therefore, even though a lack of diversity has been present for quite some time, our society today has given this issue much more attention than the amount of attention people paid to this subject years ago.

Gutworth has presented that there are numerous issues that occur due to
inconsiderate behaviors many people have toward those of a different gender, race or
ethnic background, such as viewing people of another race, gender, or ethnic background
as less knowledgeable or less credible as them self or as someone of their gender, race or
ethnicity (Gutworth, 2015). Therefore, this may have been a reason why many people
didn’t vote for Hillary Clinton when she first ran for president since some of them
probably thought that since she’s a woman, she wouldn’t have been able to run our
country. Another discriminative belief that people who didn’t vote for her may have came
up with is that they may have seen her as a liability because she is a woman and that they
would feel more comfortable if a man was their president. Another credible source that
has expressed a concern with people who view those of a different gender, race or ethnic
background as unequal is when Peter Northouse stated that some people live by
ethnocentrism and they are prejudice to others because they aren’t the same gender, race
or ethnicity as them (Northouse, 2013, p. 420).

It is very unfortunate, but there are definitely people out there who didn’t vote for Hillary Clinton because she is a woman and there are some people who didn’t vote for Obama because of the color of his skin, whether those particular people are willing to admit it or not. I totally disagree with that reasoning, but some people are both racist and sexist to this day, which needs to come to an end immediately. The lack of diversity has been an ongoing issue in various industries worldwide and in order for the amount of diversity to rise to a reasonable extent, egocentrism needs to stop completely and people can no longer be prejudice towards those of other genders, races, and ethnicities, which is going to be very difficult to do. In summary, the lack of diversity is less of an issue today than it has been more many years, but there is still much to be done to lessen the gap between the amount of male leaders there are and female leaders there are, in addition to increasing the amount of diverse leaders. Even though problems will likely arise in the process of making our society more diverse, the benefits will be recognized in doing so and people will realize that they won’t regret it.

References

1. Gutworth, M., (2015), PSYCH 485: Leadership in Work Settings, Penn State Angel, Retrieved from:
https://courses.worldcampus.psu.edu/su15/psych485/002/content/13_lesson/06_page.html

2. Northouse, P. (2013). Leadership: Theory and practice (6th ed.). Los Angeles: Sage
Publications.

Team Leadership Blog Post

by

Justin Sardis
Psych 485
Team Leadership Blog Post

Team Leadership is a concept that is beneficial, but also necessary in any field or industry, other than the limited number of industries that don’t require collaborating with others. Since their aren’t many industries in which people work alone, Team Leadership is a relevant and a crucial topic of discussion and implementation for the vast majority of circumstances. Many people refer to the saying “two minds are better than one”, which infers that when two or more people work together, they’ll come to a better and more accurate result than if they were to work alone. Gutworth (2015) has emphasized the aspect of teamwork even when the team members are in different locations from each other, which is known as “Geographically dispersed teams” (Gutworth, 2015). This aspect of Team Leadership is presented by the idea that many companies have offices worldwide, which means that employees of those businesses are communicating and working with one another from very distant locations. If employees aren’t capable of doing so, the company will suffer and the employees may lose their job. Hence, “Geographically dispersed teams” is an important aspect of Team Leadership due to how frequently this aspect arises (Gutworth, 2015).

A personal endeavor in which I’m currently experiencing a “Geographically dispersed team” is that my friend and I are in the process of working with a screenwriter to create a TV show and a movie. My friend, the screenwriter and I have all had to communicate via phone calls and emails because we’re all living in different states that aren’t so close to one another. This type of communication is required because the three of us aren’t able to meet in person as frequently as when we need to talk to each other. Therefore, it is very important that we are capable of communicating to each other and are able to absorb and process the messages that are being sent without having to be in the same room as the people that are conversing with each other. Even though communicating with other people in person is the best option, there are countless occupations that require people to speak to others over the phone and over the internet. In summary, my experience of having to work with other people that are in different states than I am has made me realize the significance of being able to communicate in ways that aren’t face-to-face, which is referred to as a “Geographically dispersed team” (Gutworth, 2015). In addition, due to rapid innovation of technology, this concept is only becoming more common and more convenient, which means that it is only going to become more relevant and will also be required more frequently in our lives.

Many groups and organizations are unable to accomplish their goals and much of the reason is due to their inability to incorporate Team Leadership. Furthermore, Gutworth (2015) has clarified multiple components of team leadership, which she’s referred to as “Outcomes of Team Leadership”. One of the most common “Outcomes of Team Leadership” that groups and organizations frequently encounter is that they are unable to have a “Collaborative Climate”, which is when a team is able to have faith in one another in relation to believing that each person the team is comprised of will complete the task they’ve been assigned (Gutworth, 2015). Another source has also mentioned this idea by presenting that “authentic leadership is a collective process” and in order to have “authentic leadership”, it requires not only the contribution from the leader or leaders, but more importantly the inclusion of other members of the group or organization (Northouse, 2013, p. 282).

A experience in which I’ve encountered this particular “Outcome of Team Leadership” was when I was in an organization ran by students who didn’t allow me to do any part of my job without their approval and the vast majority of the time, they denied my ideas that would’ve been beneficial to the organization if they were implemented. This endeavor presents that the other members of the executive board of this organization didn’t have faith in me to do my part, which is a significant concept of a “Collaborative Climate” (Gutworth, 2015). As a result, this limited the amount of money our organization was able to raise in our efforts to benefit “THON”, which presents that our organization didn’t accomplish what we wanted to, which is another important component of this particular outcome. Hence, this experience clearly expresses how a “Collaborative Climate” can have a significant impact and can result with a group or organization failing to achieve their goals (Gutworth, 2015).

References

1. Gutworth, M., (2015), PSYCH 485: Leadership in Work Settings, Penn State Angel,
Retrieved from:https://courses.worldcampus.psu.edu/su15/psych485/002/content/09_lesson/07_page.html

2. Northouse, P. (2013). Leadership: Theory and practice (6th ed.). Los Angeles: Sage
Publications.

Justin Sardis-Psych 485 Power & Influence Blog Post

by

Justin Sardis
Psych 485
Power & Influence Blog Entry

In almost any industry, there are countless situations in which decisions that people make are impacted by power and influence. One reason that power and influence take its course is because many people are hungry to have more power at work, in a group, or on a team. Another reason for this is that on many occasions, people feel pressured to do something by someone with more power and influence then him or her. Some people are more easily influenced by others and feel anxious about the negative possibilities that may arise if they don’t do what they are being asked to do, such as getting fired from a job or losing a friend. On the contrary, many people strive to gain power and are willing to do whatever it takes so they can have more power and may be convinced by others that he or she needs to do something in particular in order to achieve their goal of gaining power.
A personal endeavor in which someone attempted to influence me to do something was when friends of mine wanted me to include their other friends that I weren’t my friends with in our plans, which I didn’t want to do. My friends tried to guilt trip me and make me feel bad if I chose to not include their other friends. Therefore, I felt some pressure from my friends and I didn’t want to make my friends upset and as a result, I included their friends in our plans. In this scenario, I was influenced by my friends due to them expressing power they had to motivate me to do something I wasn’t interested in doing, which was including their friends in our plans. This is an example of a very minor decision I made due to the influence of others, but this topic is very significant and meaningful since people frequently make use of their power to influence their friends or co-workers to make important decisions that can potentially harm many other people. For example, people that join gangs or terrorist groups are forced by others to do harmful things to others in order to become a member of their group and to remain a member of their group, which is an indication of a negative influence that people experience because of power that others have.
Previous research has indicated that followers, also known as group members that aren’t leaders, are often influenced by their leaders to do certain things in order for the leader to become more powerful, or for the followers to gain power (Northouse, 2013). Furthermore, previous research has also expressed that followers may be inspired by leaders, which may result with the followers doing certain things that may be unjust in order to become the leader they desire to be. This belief is referred to as the “LMX Theory”, which is an abbreviation for “Leader-Member Exchange Theory” (Northouse, 2013). Even though some people may be negatively influenced by a leader, their are many leaders who express their power to positively influence their followers.
In summary, power and influence often come into the equation when people desire to obtain more power and to gain the ability to have a greater influence on others and at work. There are cases when power and influence can be beneficial to both parties in the situation, but their are many occasions when power and influence lead to harmful outcomes for at least one of the parties involved. Many people feel pressured and obligated to do things due to the power and influence their “higher-ups” have and put forth, which is a dilemma that will most likely never come to an end.

Reference

1. Northouse, P. (2013). Leadership: Theory and practice (6th ed.). Los Angeles: Sage
Publications.

Psych 485 – Contingency & Path-Goal Blog Entry

by

Justin Sardis

Fiedler’s contingency model is the most well known contingency model and it resembles the trait approach that states leaders cannot change their leadership approach (Northouse, 2013). However, even if this theory is the most popular theory, its still a theory, which means it’s a claim that hasn’t been proven true. That being said, I personally disagree with this perspective to a some degree because if the CEO of a company realizes that how he or she is running their business isn’t the most efficient and productive way, he or she would alter the way they do things and how their employees take care of their tasks at work. Many leaders may not be able to change to become the leader their company aspires them to be, but some leaders have in fact do so, which means that Fiedler’s Contingency Theory isn’t universally proven to be true. Fiedler’s contingency theory also portrays that some leaders are more successful and beneficial to their organization than other people would be under certain circumstances Northouse, 2013). An example of this would be when Paul Pierce was able to be a leader during the NBA playoffs when he was on the Los Angeles Clippers, but he wasn’t able to do so when he played for the Brooklyn Nets just a season before. On the Los Angeles Clippers, he was the go-to player to give the ball to in order to make the game winning shot, but on the Brooklyn Nets, he didn’t make much of a contribution.
An additional aspect of Fiedler’s contingency model is that even though there are leaders who are better than other leaders in certain situations, that doesn’t mean the other leaders wouldn’t be a better leader than them if they are in an alternative environment (Northouse, 2013). For example, even though my friend may be a better leader than I am on our summer league basketball team, I may be a better leader than him as a project manager at work. Furthermore, contingency means when someone or something depends on someone or something else, which is relevant to Fiedler’s Contingency Theory because this theory states that the success rate of a leader is dependent upon how the leader and their teammates or group members work together and produce (Northouse, 2013). Another aspect of Fiedler’s contingency model is that leaders act the same way throughout a long period of time and over various scenarios (Northouse, 2013). This is another part of this theory that I don’t necessarily agree with because in some circumstances this may be true but in others’ it may not be.
The path-goal theory is also considered as a contingency theory since this theory also states that a leader’s impact on their followers has much to do with how he or she interacts with their followers (Northouse, 2013). More specifically, the path-goal theory emulates that the leader’s success is reliant upon their interpersonal relationships and their behavior towards the followers in the group or organization when the leader is assigning tasks to them (Northouse, 2013). In addition, the leader’s lasting effect on their followers also has to do with how their followers act upon their leader’s requests. For example, if the followers don’t respect their leader, they may not do what their leader has asked them to do, which means the leader will have to take the fall for the organization. Another example of this dilemma would be if one of the group members doesn’t do their part and the other group members see that the leader doesn’t act on that, they likely won’t do their part and they may not agree to pick up the slack of their group member that didn’t do their part. Hence, the leader would have to take the blame for the lack of effort of the one group member that didn’t do what the leader assigned them to do.
In summary, the path-goal theory and Fiedler’s Contingency theory are both considered as contingency theories since they both state the amount that a leader benefits or harms their organization is reliant upon the situation, how they act towards the other members of the organization and how the other members of their organization act towards the leader. However, Fiedler’s Contingency Model, also known as Fiedler’s Contingency Theory, is differs from the path-goal theory in that the path-goal theory is a part of groups of theories, but Fiedler’s Contingency Model specifically attempts to put leaders in the scenario where they are the most applicable (Northouse, 2013). Since Fiedler’s Contingency Theory is the most well-known contingency theory, many people frequently refer to it over the other contingency theories. Although, many people have strong beliefs about this theory and don’t consider that people can learn and become the leader their organization is desperate for them to be.

Reference

1. Northouse, P. (2013). Leadership: Theory and practice (6th ed.). Los Angeles: Sage Publications.

Skills Approach Blog Entry

by

 

The Skills Approach is the belief that people aren’t born to be leaders, which means that people become leaders by learning and changing their behavior in ways that the person will benefit their group and make sure the group achieves their goal (Northouse, 2013). This approach also presents that in order for someone to be a leader, the person needs to have a positive impact on their followers so that he or she can help each follower with their responsibilities and ensure that each of them get their job done. This approach contradicts the traits approach, which states that people are born as leaders, people can’t and don’t learn to behave in ways that leaders do, and those who are leaders naturally have what it takes to be a leader (Northouse, 2013). From my previous experience working in various restaurants and being involved in many organizations, I have been surrounded by people who strongly believe in the Skills Approach, and I know others that solely abide by the Trait Approach. A particular example of when I’ve been involved in an organization where the leaders didn’t believe that people could learn and become leaders was a student-ran club called The Nittany Consulting Group. When I wanted to be a leader, they didn’t allow me to be one because of their ridiculous mentality that I didn’t have what it takes, when they never gave me the chance to learn or give my input. Ironically, my involvement in the organization only benefitted The Nittany Consulting Group and various members in this organization praised me for my contributions to the organization. Therefore, if the executive board changed their mentality and went with the Skills Approach, I could’ve made even more of a beneficial impact while I was a member of the group. Therefore, an author by the name of Peter Northouse would probably consider this scenario to be a very limited “social performance”, which is being able to persuade others, discuss changes to be made, and eventually make changes (Northouse, 2013, p. 50). Hence, this is an example of a group of people that strongly believe in the Trait Approach, which they clearly expressed to me and they experienced a downfall in their organization due to their unwillingness in giving me an opportunity to be more of a leader of the group.

Northouse would also likely view this as the executive board being unable to address “Behavioral Flexibility” due to the following reasons: One of the executive board members of this group was successful in running another organization and the rest of the executive board members would agree with everything she would say to do. The executive board members gave her too much power and she wouldn’t bother listening to others since she would never consider anyone else’s perspective. In relation to this example, “Behavior Flexibility is “the capacity to change and adapt one’s behavior in the light of an understanding of others’ perspectives in the organization” (Northouse, 2013, p. 50). Therefore, this particular member of the executive board was definitely unable to express “Behavior Flexibility” and this had a tremendously harmful impact on the amount this group could have received in donations and fundraising.

An additional opinion that Northouse would have of this scenario would be that this is an example of a bias in “social perceptiveness” since he’s stated that “social perceptiveness” is the “insight and awareness into how others in the organization function” (Northouse, 2013, p. 50). He would consider my experience to be a bias in “social perceptiveness” since this particular executive board member never thought about how my contributions and my committee’s contributions on fundraising efforts would benefit the organization. She denied every idea that I had and that my committee members had in order for us to spend our own time trying to raise money for our organization so we could have raised a lot more money than we did. Not only did she deny every idea that we had, she didn’t provide any ideas of her own. That being said, she didn’t give us any ideas of how she wanted us to plan events to receive donations. Therefore, this is an example that clearly represents how this particular executive board member, who is considered as a “great leader of the organization” has a lack of “social perceptiveness”.

 

 

Reference

  1. Northouse, P. (2013). Leadership: Theory and practice (6th ed.). Los Angeles: Sage Publications.
Skip to toolbar