Leadership

PSYCH 485 blog

Can the LMX Theory Be Used to Change a Leader?

by

As I was reading through the Leader-Member Exchange (LMX) Theory, I had a lot of mixed feelings. I can definitely see the strengths and weaknesses. As a strength, my favorite and, perhaps most useful is that the LMX theory alerts leaders to what they may be doing unconsciously, which is excluding followers from the in-group (Northouse, 2013). The principles of the LMX theory can be a useful reminder for leaders to be fair and equal in approaching their relationships with subordinates (Northouse, 2013). 

 

As I read on I decided to complete the LMX 7 Questionnaire. I am not currently employed, so I had to use a past experience of my direct interactions with a supervisor at my last job. As I took the questionnaire everything became really clear to me as I thought about my time at my last job. I worked at a daycare for four years. At the beginning of my employment at this daycare, I strongly disliked the supervisor in question. I thought she was rude and disrespectful at times. Her personality was one of those “I don’t care what you think, I’m going to do my thing.” I felt like she always tried to cut corners and she did not follow the rules of the center. I really did not know her, but this is what I thought from afar as I tried as hard as possible to not go anywhere near her because she just bothered me.

At this point, she was not necessarily dubbed a “supervisor,” but she was a prominent figure at our center because she was one of the veteran employees who had been there for 20+ years. To make a long story short, the leadership changed after about a year and a half of my working there and the change brought about a lot of structural changes that put this woman in a supervisory position. One of her duties in this position was to take on the monthly and daily schedules with another room lead that was put into the same position. These two women basically run the center. They became the first in the chain of command to go to if you had a problem.

 

After the structural change in our center, a lot of the employees, including myself, were moved to new rooms. I was moved to a room that I knew nothing about. I never took the time to get to know all the people that I worked with, so I did not really know the staff in that room either. I was in what Northouse calls, the “out-group.” Because of the room that I was associated with previously, not many people liked me. My past room leader had a reputation of being a “snitch” and talking a lot behind people’s backs. I was stigmatized as being the same way and I did not even know it. No one else in the center knew my potential as a caregiver and a person and because they associated me with my previous room lead, they did not really give me a chance. It actually wasn’t until I went on maternity leave and came back and became what we referred to as a “floater” that the rest of the center really got to know me and my abilities and strengths as a caregiver because I was bouncing around to all the different rooms on a daily basis. This is when I slowly made my way into the “in-group.” At one point, I was the only person available to go into my supervisor’s room. It was at this point that we began to develop a relationship.

 

Suddenly, the woman that I despised for quite some time was one of my biggest fans in the center. She saw my potential in the classroom and I liked her style of teaching. She may not have followed the rules, but she had good kids in her room and she had good kids in her room because she did not necessarily follow the rules. She provided direct consequences and followed through with everything she said she was going to do. We worked well together and got to know each other on a professional and a personal level and thus, my transition into the in-group was complete. I did not mind taking on extra roles for her and for the good of the room and she could trust that I would do things how she wanted them to be done so she gave me a lot of freedom in her room (Northouse, 2013).  I received information, influence and a lot of confidence and concern from her (Northouse, 2013). She learned to trust me so much that she would schedule me for the shifts that I wanted (the ones that everyone wanted) because she knew I would show up and I was dependable (in my daycare we had a lot of people call in sick on a regular basis). Other employees started to think she favored me, and she did, but it was because I did what she asked and she knew she could depend on me.

 

There are a lot of employees that do not like her because they think she plays favorites. She does. My coworkers would often be upset because I was in her room and they thought her room was overstaffed with me in it. She kept me in there because I was happy there and because she was happy with me in there. I was on the inside track and I knew her reasons for her actions because she would tell me, so I would often end up sticking up for her when other employees would speak badly of her even though I could understand completely where they were coming from. It was kind of hard to be in the in-group because people were constantly criticizing us and what we were doing and I often wished they would just mind their own business and leave it alone. I know that she was not always right, but she often stuck her neck out for me and I really appreciated that. It’s unfortunate that others had it more difficult because I was once in their shoes, but at the same time I also felt like I had “paid my dues” so-to-speak. I did the work to get where I was.

 

The LMX Theory could potentially be useful here, but I think it really depends on the person. What I mean by this is, yes, it is useful in that it can make leaders aware of their interactions with their subordinates. However, I think the individual leader plays a key role. Some leaders already know what they are doing. My supervisor knew what she was doing and I think if she were trained on the LMX Theory, she would continue to handle things the same way. That’s just who she is. Some leaders just do not get along with some subordinates and vice versa. Unless they are open to change, I am not really sure being aware of their faults are enough to change their leadership style.

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

A Great Place to Work!

by

I was 19 years old and I will never forget my first day. I walked in and proceeded to the customer service desk. “I’m here for training,” I said. As I nervously awaited to be given further instructions a woman with bright red hair and an attitude like no other approached me. I followed her through the produce area…I followed her past the tremendous produce section, the deli and the butcher area. We turned the corner and I nervously walked past all of the “veteran” employees sitting in the break room where they were probably summing me up. Finally, we reached our destination. I sat at a long table along with a few others like myself. There were pens on the table and a stack of paperwork that I would no doubt have to sign throughout my very first shift as a Wegmans employee. It was in this room that I began to learn just why Wegmans has been on Fortune 500’s top companies to work for since 1998. It was hear that I learned that the company I was about to work for was determined to make their employees happy. This may seem odd to you. After all, isn’t the primary goal of a thriving business in customer service to make the customers happy first? Of course. However, here is the reasoning behind it and it’s quite simple: happy employees will be happy to do their jobs and thus be more likely to provide excellent customer service.

So how do you make your employees SO happy that they want to give the best customer service? First of all, during the second phase of the interview process, your interview consists of finding out which department best fits your interests. This is a key step because if the aim is to keep employees happy, then what better way than to match them up with a job that they are happy with? We had a lot of incentives and were rewarded a lot based on our customer service. Cashiers were also kept in friendly competition with each other. During my first two years at Wegmans I was a cashier. In the little coat room on the front end of the store each day we could find how many items per minute (IPMs) we rang up on our previous shift. We were rewarded for quick service as we were a very busy store and the faster you can move your customers through, the happier they are. Our leaders were approachable and were genuinely concerned for our well-being, but they were distanced enough that we could not consider them “friends.” They listened to us and realized that the customer was not always right. I can tell you from first hand experience that this was the best place that I have ever worked because of their focus on the employees. I can also tell you that they have deserved all of the recognition that they’ve gotten from Fortune 500 Magazine. They have been voted the number one place to work and they have every right to be there. I can also tell you, after being a military spouse and moving around a bit, I have definitely noticed a different quality and standard in every other grocery store I have been in. I guess I am somewhat of a Wegmans “snob.”

So the next question you are probably asking is, what does this have to do with anything? Well, while I read the chapter on the Path-Goal Theory, the very first sentence made me think of my time at Wegmans. Northouse (2013) notes that the path-goal theory is about leaders motivating their subordinates to accomplish a goal. The focus on employee motivation is thought to heighten employee performance and satisfaction (Northouse, 2013). This was definitely my experience at Wegmans. Yes, it was a job and no, I did not always jump out of bed and say “Hey! I can’t wait to get to work today!” However, especially looking back and having multiple other employers since my five or six years of service at Wegmans, I can totally appreciate this company and look back on them with fond memories. Because of my positive experience with the company as an employee in addition to other people’s positive experiences (coworkers and customers), I think that the path-goal theory is my favorite thus far. The leaders of the Wegmans company provided a supportive leadership for their subordinates in which they went out of their way to make work a positive place for their employees (Northouse, 2013). The management at the store where I worked did this as well.

 

Where it may not be the ideal situation for everyone and every company is different in their styles and beliefs, for Wegmans, this style of supporting and motivating their employees works for them. Their success in the mid-Atlantic speaks for itself as well as their reputation with Fortune 500. In addition, I know a lot of my coworkers from the store (and I am still friends with all of them) have many positive experiences to share as well. In my opinion, this is leadership at its finest.

 

I think this video pretty much sums up everything from both an employee perspective and a customer perspective. Enjoy! (WegmansWhoWeAre, 2011)

 

 

Note: This year Wegmans is ranked as the 4th best place to work according to the Fortune 500 Magazine. http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/best-companies/2012/snapshots/4.html

 

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

WegmansWhoWeAre (4 January 2011). Wegmans: A great place to shop and a great place to work. Retrieved 2October2012 from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DJS1F3lpphw&feature=related .

There is No “I” in Team

by

How many of you own an iPod? How many of you own an iPhone or an iPad? How many of you do all of your coursework on a Macbook? The Apple industry has dramatically changed electronics in recent years. I, personally own each of the above mentioned products and sadly, I feel as though I cannot live without them.

I found a short clip of an interview with Steve Jobs, the co-founder and CEO of Apple, who is largely responsible for all of the products that many of us have come so accustomed to. In the interview, he describes the Apple team and how it works. Take a minute and click on this link to watch the clip (Ragni, 2010). Note: If the link does not work, please copy and paste from the references at the bottom of the page.

While searching for inspiration, I watched several of the videos about Jobs, but this particular one really shows why the Apple company is a success. Jobs explains that he and his colleagues are a team. By placing so much emphasis on his colleagues as a team, it is easy to see why Apple is so successful and Jobs, himself, is a leader. Jobs explains that they have no committees at Apple. There is one person in charge of every aspect from their software system to marketing. Each of those people come together in one room once a week and meet for three hours to discuss everything. By appointing just one person to each necessary are of the company and all coming together once a week, they are creating success within the company. Having only one person be in charge of each aspect, allows for less confusion within the company of who is doing what. If there is only one person in charge of the operating system and there is a problem with the operating system, it makes it easy to rectify the situation. Jobs describes how the company works and how the teamwork at the “top” of the company creates tremendous teamwork at the “bottom” of the company. Jobs states that he meets all day with teams of people to solve problems and create new products. This exemplifies how the teamwork within the company creates great communication and an overall better product. Finally, one of the best parts in the clip, I think, was when Steve Jobs was asked if people are willing to tell Jobs that he is wrong. Steve responds by saying that they have “wonderful arguments” and also by stating that he does not win every argument. He goes on to say that if you want to hire great people and keep great people working for you, you have to let them make decisions.

I think Jobs was a great leader. He not only has a successful product (I will never buy another Microsoft product again, though I think Bill Gates is a genius), but through his statements about teamwork it is obvious that he cares about not just the company, but the people that work there as well. He values the opinions and suggestions of his subordinates and he allows for them to tell him he is wrong. He recognizes that to get and keep the best workers, they need to be able to be heard and feel valued. Apple is not just Steve Jobs’ vision, it’s the vision of his colleagues as well.

To relate this to the lessons this week, I think that by allowing his colleagues to be heard he is able to develop interpersonal relationships. If you watched the clip, you would know that he mentions trust as being a key in how the company works. In order to trust people, you need to know them to an extent. I think he is also task oriented. While his goals are not apparent from the clip, it is obvious that he had goals. In fact, in another video that I watched, one of his keys to success was to have a “clear vision.” From a style approach, I would say that Jobs probably has a middle-of-the-road style, which describes leaders as having equal (intermediate) concern for both task and the people doing the task (Northouse, 2013). In my opinion, he does not sway too much on either end of the spectrum on the leadership grid mentioned in the text (Northouse, 2013). I do not know what your opinions of his products are, but I, for one, think the quality of his products are top notch, which proves his success as a leader further as well as the success of the company.

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

Ragni (12 June 2010). Steve Jobs talks about managing people. Retrieved on 26 September 2012 from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f60dheI4ARg&feature=related

I am a Leader

by

I would like to take a moment to tell you all about a new business venture I have just begun. First, you will need some background information about me and a little about the business as well.

 

Health and fitness is something I have been very passionate about for the last six or seven years. However, I recently joined the world of the unemployed and I have been stuck in a rut so-to-speak with no motivation to commit to a fit and healthy lifestyle. I needed something that would get me motivated and get me back on track. After a lot of thought and deliberation, I decided that I would become a fitness coach. I can do this all from the comfort of my home and I will be helping others while essentially helping myself (financially and physically and mentally). It’s a win-win.  I will tell you a little about the company, but I am not trying to “sell” myself or the company here so I am going to just tell you what the company does and what they are about so that you can get the idea. The company I am involved in sells popular fitness programs and various health supplements. It doesn’t stop there. They also provide coaches and the coaches have teams that they basically mentor. This allows for accountability and motivation to help men and women achieve their fitness and health goals. On the company’s website, you can also find “workout buddies” and actually schedule workouts with other people if that’s what keeps you motivated. So what does this have to do with leadership?

 

In the past week, I have come into contact with so many people that are a part of this organization that I consider to be great leaders. The reason I feel this way, since I do not know many of them personally, is because of certain traits that I see. Northouse (2013) describes intelligence, self-confidence, determination, integrity, and sociability as five central traits to being a great leader. In my experience so far, every one of the members of this group possess each of those qualities. In order to be successful in this business (which is essentially marketing a product), coaches have to be intelligent. A certain amount of credibility is needed. You need to not only know all there is to know about the product, but in this case, you really do have to know something about health and fitness. Self-confidence is also a key component. How can you expect someone to have confidence in you if you do not have confidence in yourself? The men and women that are a part of this have so much self-confidence and they have a right to this confidence because they all work hard to get where they are. Determination. This is one of those businesses that you get what you put in. If you are not determined and do not have goals, then this is not a business for you. Integrity also fits in here because even though these men and women are ultimately selling a product, people trust in them and believe in them because they are actually a product of the product they are selling. Last, but certainly not least, sociability is very important. This is a business that thrives on making contacts and spreading the word that the programs work.

 

Aside from all of the specific traits mentioned, this is a group of very motivational people. They motivate others and they all want to help others and that drives them to succeed. In my eyes, they are leaders. They lead others to fulfill their health and fitness goals and they are all extremely passionate about it. They are so passionate and so motivated that it is contagious. Though I have not always considered myself to be a leader, I am about to be one for sure. I am a leader…here’s to hoping I am a successful leader!

 

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

Do ‘Natural’ Born Leaders Exist?

by

bates-congratulations.jpg

We’ve all heard the old adage “(S)He’s a born leader.” This saying is something I have personally heard all throughout my life. However, when really thought about, this sends a pretty strong message that people are born leaders and if such people were born leaders then that what makes someone a “born” leader? Is it inherited? If my mom is a “born” leader, does that automatically make me a leader? What if I do not want to be a leader? If I was born to be one, will I be one anyway? This seems kind of silly to me, but that’s just my opinion.

 

            The trait approach was studied to determine what makes great leaders (Northouse, 2013). Northouse (2013) points out five major characteristics that are considered “major” leadership traits, which include intelligence, self-confidence, determination, integrity, and sociability. I agree that these are all good traits that encompass some other good traits (sociability would include charisma, outgoingness, friendly, for example) for a leader to have. However, are all of these traits and the traits fall under them traits that we are born with? Let’s think about this. Are you born with self-confidence? Or is that something that is fostered in you as a child by the way your parents raise you? Anyone who has taken any developmental or social psychology courses would be knowledgeable in such theories like Bandura’s social learning theory. Bandura conducted a very popular experiment with a Bobo doll on aggressive behaviors. You can watch a short clip HERE. How about Skinner’s behaviorism approach? Jean Piaget was a developmental psychologist who suggested that children learn through their experiences and interactions. So, therefore, can’t these leadership traits be learned instead of born? There are some traits that I think are definitely inherited such as intelligence. However, of the five traits mentioned by Northouse, that is the only thing that I can see as something that is inherited.

 

            I just spent the last four years of my life working in a daycare on a military base. I have spent a lot of time with children from the ages of 3-6 years old and in my four years of working there I can tell you that some kids are just smarter than others. Some of this is because of the time they spend with their parents and some of it is just because they are more gifted than others. I think most of us can relate to such things just in our education as children. Some kids had “it” and some kids didn’t. Through working with children at this age, I have learned though, that they are giant sponges. Some of them have been socialized well and some have not. Some have confidence and some do not. I think that to an extent, this can be something they are “born” with, but I really and truly believe that children are largely influenced by the interactions they have in their lives. If Jenny is always encouraged to try things on her own and she is encouraged to be brave and talk to that little girl across the playground that she wants to play with, if she is encouraged from a young age to stand up for herself, if her caregivers let her fail and teach her how to deal with it and if they praise her successes, this is going to create a much different persona than Jimmy whose parents do everything for him and he is not encouraged to be social with other kids his age and he is never taught how to deal with success and failure.

           

            The bottom line is that yes, there are certain traits that we are born with that assist in our leadership abilities. However, many of the important traits listed are traits that can be learned or fostered from a young age based on a child’s environment and their parent’s views and how they raise their children. Thus, as of now, I don’t really subscribe to the notion that there are natural born leaders. There are many ways to become a leader. Traits are important, but just because you possess a certain trait does not mean that you were born

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

Bandura original footage [Web]. (2009). Retrieved from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jWsxfoJEwQQ

Skip to toolbar