Leadership

PSYCH 485 blog

Glass Ceilings to Labyrinths: Where does USA Compare with Other Countries?

by

The term “glass ceiling” has been part of our corporate and political vocabularies since Hymowitz and Schellhardt introduced it the mid-1980s in a Wall Street Journal report.  This invisible barrier hovers beneath the top of the corporate ladder and obstructs most women from reaching its highest rungs.  A more accurate metaphor for this challenge that women face in their careers is Eagly and Carli’s “labyrinth” because it describes the concept as an intricate journey toward a goal which requires persistence, cognizance of one’s advancement, and analysis of approaching problems (Quast, 2011).  Regardless of the terminology used, women around the world face similar barriers to top management positions.  These barriers may be organizational, interpersonal, or personal in nature, and below is a brief account of how American women compare with our foreign counterparts (Pennsylvania, 2014).  A Glass-ceiling index of 26 countries can be found here, which takes five indicators into account:  number of men and women with post-secondary education, female labor force participation, male-female wage gap, proportion of women in senior-level jobs, and net child-care costs in relation to the average wage (The glass ceiling index, 2013).

According to the above-referenced index, the United States ranks 12th highest among the 26 countries examined.  Part of the reason behind this middle-of-the-road rating could be due to U.S. companies not offering paid maternity leave.  Many other countries offer new parents part-time, flexible or telecommuting schedules without consequences, and Germany and Spain require employers to keep positions open for employees on parental leave for up to three years.  Also, career paths become varied for many American women because they tend to take on more responsibility than men when trying to balance work and home life.  Despite these hindrances, American women now share equal opportunity for managerial positions as men; there are just less women in the labor force overall (Rampell, 2013).  Still, very few women are reaching the top of the corporate ladder.  According to some female execs, the reasons are: job segregation, the “old-boy network”, sex discrimination, sexual harassment, and lax enforcement of anti-discrimination laws (Empowering women, 2014).

In Norway, the highest-ranked country on the index, the law has helped women shatter the corporate glass ceiling.  A quota law was introduced in 2003, and since that time, all of Norway’s publicly traded companies are in compliance with securing a minimum number of women, 40 percent, on their boards.  Any corporation in violation would be shut down.  In addition, Norway has a tradition of shared parenting, so there is less strain on women struggling to balance both work and parenting roles (Harman, 2011).  Well over half post-secondary students in Norway are female, and the country consistently scores in the top five regarding gender equality.  Two-thirds of college-educated women work in the public sector, and the growing visibility of these women could encourage younger women to pursue similar career paths in business; however, there is still room for improvement beyond the boardroom, such as senior-level management and tenured professors in academic settings (Sihvola, 2011).

Due to the combination of several detrimental factors, South Korea lies on the bottom of the index.  This country has the longest work day in the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), which makes balancing work and parenting particularly challenging for mothers.  Also, there is a lack of daycare centers, and many women choose to leave the workforce due to Korea’s male-dominated business culture.  Compared to Norway’s obligatory 40 percent female board members, South Korea’s female board representation is a mere one percent.  Despite matching their male counterparts in educational attainment, the female labor force participation rate is only 55 percent.  This is largely due to the immense pressure on Asian women to become full-time mothers once they begin having families.  So, it seems South Korea is struggling to employ females, let alone to push them through the corporate glass ceiling (Jung-a, 2013).  It is essential for this country to first amend its business culture before women can make any significant strides through the corporate labyrinth.

While the U.S. performs reasonably well in its attempt to breach this invisible barrier, we still have quite a road to travel to become as successful as the Nordic countries.  I was surprised to see that Canada ranks fourth on the index.  Although they are placed considerably higher than the U.S., they face similar struggles as American women.  A majority of female Canadian business leaders admit that men are paid more and are more likely to be promoted.  Most of these leaders also feel that a woman’s appearance plays a large role in climbing the corporate ladder (Canadian women, 2013).  Despite one’s country of origin, women around the globe face similar obstacles in their ascent to the top of the corporate ladder.  I believe the U.S. could improve its index rating if men were to contribute more help in childrearing, and if a quota law such as Norway’s was enacted in the states.  These two delimiting factors appear to be consistent among several countries.

References:

Canadian women business leaders feel underpaid. (2013). Retrieved from http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/canadian-women-business-leaders-feel-underpaid-1.2054440

Empowering women in business. (2014). Retrieved from http://www.feminist.org/research/business/ewb_glass.html

Harman, S. (2011, April 13). Europe takes note as Norway smashes the glass ceiling. Retrieved from  http://www.dw.de/europe-takes-note-as-norway-smashes-the-glass-ceiling/a-14987093-1

Hymowitz, C., & Schellhardt, T. D. (1986, March 24). The glass ceiling: Why women can’t seem to break the invisible barrier that blocks them from the top jobs. The Wall Street Journal, D1, D4-D-5.

Jung-a, S. (2013, June 12). South Korean women face glass ceiling in workforce. Retrieved from http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/50242166-ce60-11e2-8313-00144feab7de.html#axzz2zZ4h1CTS

Pennsylvania State University World Campus. (2014). Lesson Commentary 13: Leadership and diversity. Retrieved from https://courses.worldcampus.psu.edu/sp14/psych485/001/content/13_lesson/01_page.html

Quast, L. (2011, November 14). Is there really a glass ceiling for women?  Retrieved from http://www.forbes.com/sites/lisaquast/2011/11/14/is-there-really-a-glass-       ceiling-for- women/#./?&_suid=139794990289203370375045683845

Rampell, C. (2013, April 2). Comparing the world’s glass ceilings. Retrieved from http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/04/02/comparing-the-worlds-glass- ceilings/?_php=true&_type=blogs&_php=true&_type=blogs&_php=true&_type=blogs&_r=2

Shivola, E. A. M. (2011, April 12). Hitting the glass ceiling. Retrieved from http://harvardpolitics.com/covers/women-in-the-world/hitting-the-glass-ceiling/

The glass ceiling index. (2013). Retrieved from http://www.economist.com/blogs/graphicdetail/2013/03/daily-chart-3

Forming a Dream Team in Organizational Situations

by

We have all seen stories and images of American dream teams.  Sports teams such as the 1980 U.S. men’s hockey and 1992 U.S. men’s basketball Olympic teams, innovative business teams that founded or rebuilt organizations like Mac and Ford, as well as teams of incredible scientists who have united to fight cancer, have all been labeled “dream teams” by the media.  These teams have accomplished great goals, and it makes me wonder how the teams were assembled and how they worked together to achieve success.  Accordingly, how can we as students and workers relate the elements of these “dream teams” into our everyday work groups?

dream team Photo courtesy of: http://www.dreamstime.com/

A team is described as a “specific type of group composed of members who are interdependent, who share common goals, and who must coordinate their activities to accomplish these goals” (Northouse, 2013, p. 287).  In 1986, researchers Hackman and Walton identified three components of effective teams (Pennsylvania, 2014):

  1. Clear, engaging direction
  2. Enabling performance situation comprised of a group structure that encourages task work, an organization context that promotes excellence, and provides coaching and assistance
  3. Adequate resources

An extraordinary team may contain additional elements.  One or more “star players”, top performers, producers, or relative experts in their fields, could be team members.   An example of an all-star team is Apple’s team of 600 talented engineers who developed, debugged, and deployed OS X in less than two years, compared to Microsoft’s team of 10,000 engineers who developed, debugged, deployed, and ultimately withdrew Windows Vista in five years (Mankins, Bird, & Root, 2013).  However, a team comprised of all stars does not guarantee success.  For instance, the movie Ocean’s Twelve starred Academy Award-winning cast members Brad Pitt, George Clooney, Julia Roberts, and Catherine Zeta-Jones, and was directed by Steven Soderbergh, an Academy Award recipient for Best Director.  The movie was not nearly as successful as it had hoped (Colvin, 2006).

“Talent wins games, but teamwork wins championships.” Michael Jordan

Regardless of team members’ star quality or lack thereof, each individual’s unique contributions should be recognized by the team.  In addition, open and clear communication should be practiced, along with allowing full participation and continuous feedback.  Extraordinary teams provide a feeling of cooperation because each member acknowledges the need for others’ expertise, knowledge, and skills.  In addition, the extraordinary team must be willing to take some risks and work through mistakes from which to learn.  This, in turn, helps to build trust and honesty.  Conflict in extraordinary groups is seen as an opportunity to generate new ideas and solve problems.  These types of teams also tackle decisions using varying methods depending on the time, commitment, and resources available (Arnold, 2013).

Team leadership can offered in the traditional leader-subordinate manner, or it can be shared by or distributed among team members, which is popular in today’s organizations (Northouse, 2013).  Hill’s Model for Team Leadership (Hill Model for Team Leadership) provides a useful tool for understanding the elaborate nature of leading teams.  Arnold (2013) expands on the functions of a leader(s) of an extraordinary team.  These leaders share responsibility and rewards with their members, and the role might shift many times throughout the process.  It is on the leaders’ shoulders to create a working atmosphere based on mutual trust and openness.

With all this in mind, when one combines all of the above elements into groups formed in the workplace or university, an efficient and successful team can be built.  A clear vision must be established, and team members should offer both diverse and shared roles.  Knowing when to offer your expertise to lead the group and when to step back are key functions of extraordinary team members.  Open communication, full participation, and cooperation create an enjoyable, workable atmosphere in which team members can progress toward the common goal.

References:

Arnold, K. (2013, July 5). What makes a team extraordinary? [Web log comment]. Retrieved from http://www.extraordinaryteam.com/what-makes-a-team-extraordinary/

Colvin, G. (2006). Why dreams fail. Retrieved from http://money.cnn.com/2006/05/30/news/newsmakers/failures1_greatteams_fortune/index.htm

Mankins, M., Bird. A., and Root, J. (2013). Making star teams out of star players. Retrieved from http://hbr.org/2013/01/making-star-teams-out-of-star-players/ar/

Northouse, P. G. (2013). Leadership: Theory and Practice (6th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA, SAGE Publications, Inc.

Pennsylvania State University World Campus, (2014). Lesson Commentary 9: Team leadership. Retrieved from https://courses.worldcampus.psu.edu/sp14/psych485/001/content/09_lesson/01_page.html

Influence Tactics

by

Effective leaders repeatedly face the challenge of influencing subordinates to accomplish organizational goals.  For leaders to effectively communicate and persuade followers, researchers have identified behavioral influence tactics to be used individually or combined with the intention of changing workers’ attitudes, beliefs, values or behaviors (Pennsylvania, 2014).  These tactics can appeal to followers’ deepest-held values, offer logic and reason, or serve as threats or demands (Hallet, 2014).  Leaders assess the situation and decide which tactic(s) would be most effective at changing their team’s behavior.  There is an art to this science of persuasion, and it is described by a psychologist named Robert Cialdini (Science of Persuasion).  Selecting the best influence tactic is an important step in achieving the desired outcome and each of us, not just business leaders, use these methods to influence the beliefs or actions of others to suit our needs.

Leadership scholars Gary Yukl and J. Bruce Tracey identified 11 influencers in the early 1980s (Hallet, 2014).  The list can be split between positive and negative, and soft (pull) and hard (push) type of strategies.  Positive tactics are described as those that do not harm relationships when you use them.  These influencers are: rational persuasion, apprising, inspirational appeal, consultation, exchange, and collaboration.  On the other hand, negative tactics are defined as those that strain relationships, hurt others, and/or damage reputations, and these include legitimization, coalition, pressure, ingratiation, and personal appeals (Hallet, 2014).  A description of each influencer can be found on this Web site 11 Influencers.  The difference between soft and hard (pull and push) tactics is the amount of freedom the leader allows the follower to accept his or her influence.  Hard tactics such as exchange, legitimization, pressure, assertiveness, apprising, and coalition offer  individuals less freedom, while soft tactics such as personal appeal, consultation, inspirational appeal, ingratiation, and rational persuasion allow more latitude in deciding whether or not to accept the influence (University, 2007).  Of course, this applies to both personal and business relationships.  Something as small as persuading your partner where to dine or what movie to watch can be almost as difficult as a CEO urging executive officers to take his or her side when make a large monetary commitment.

The list of influence tactics has also been divided into what I feel is the most important function of influencers:  effectiveness.  The distinction is a matter of opinion and varies based on the situation, but in general, the most effective influence tactics include rational persuasion, inspirational appeal, consultation, and collaboration (Rykrsmith, 2011).  As such, the remainders are considered to have a moderate or low level of effectiveness.  The latter tactics work well and possibly even better than the former in many situations.  Proper assessment of the situation, whether you are a leader or follower, and if the tactic is being used in business or personal life, will govern which tactic(s) will receive the best result.  And the tactic that is effective with a particular person or group one day might not be as effective the next day on another group.

Once a leader selects an influence tactic, its success is determined by the response of the follower.  The follower may resist the leader’s efforts to modify his or her behavior, and it may occur in a few forms.  The follower could outright refuse or ignore the leader, make excuses why they cannot comply, ask a higher authority to overrule the leader, attempt to persuade the leader to retract the pursuit, delay acting on the influence, or pretend to comply with the request while attempting to sabotage it.  Another possible outcome is unenthusiastic or apathetic compliance on the part of the follower.  The follower’s behavior would be successfully influenced, but not his or her attitude.  The third outcome, the purpose of the tactic, is commitment from the follower.  He or she chooses to accept the influence and makes a voluntary effort to do what is asked.  The result occurs because the follower willingly commits to the requested behavior (University, 2007).

In conclusion, in everyday life, choosing an influence tactic is often required when we are seeking to change the attitudes, beliefs, values, or behaviors of another individual.  In business, leaders use influencers to help achieve organizational goals through modifying their followers’ behavior.  Using these tactics to master the art of persuasion is an important function for leaders.  Any single or combination of tactics can be utilized regardless of its positive or negative, soft or hard, nature.  The leader needs to determine what influence tactic works best for the situation and the person or group.  The most effective tactics are those resulting in commitment from the follower.

 

REFERENCES:

Candy, L. (2013). 6 Influence tactics – using Cialdini’s science of persuation.  Retrieved from http://www.educational-business-articles.com/influence-tactics.html

Hallet, T. (2014). Yukl and Tracey’s influences – choosing the most appropriate approach to influence.  Retrieved from http://www.mindtools.com/pages/article/eleven-influencers.htm

Pennsylvania State University World Campus, (2014). Lesson Commentary 7: Power and Influence. Retrieved from https://courses.worldcampus.psu.edu/sp14/psych485/ 001/content/07_lesson/03_page.html

Rykrsmith, E. (2011).  Becoming a better influencer: 4 most effective influence tactics (part I). Retrieved from http://quickbase.intuit.com/blog/2011/11/15/becoming-a-better-influencer-4-most-effective-influence-tactics-part-i/

University of Nebraska-Lincoln Extension Publications (2007). Influence: the essence of leadership.  Retrieved from http://www.ianrpubs.unl.edu/pages/publicationD.jsp?publicationId=733

MY PERSONAL LEADERSHIP STYLE

by

The style approach to leadership focuses on the behavior of the leader, specifically what they do and how they act toward subordinates in various situations (Northouse, 2013).  The research on the style approach is important because it identifies the behaviors of successful leaders.  Armed with this knowledge, hiring and training programs can be created to help employees learn new behaviors.  Organizations can then promote those demonstrating these behaviors to help them achieve their goals.  In addition, this approach applies in various situations, which differs from other leadership theories (Pennsylvania, 2014).  One of the many studies conducted on the style approach was performed by Blake and Mouton.  It inspired the development of their Leadership (Managerial) Grid.  This tool analyzes an individual’s degree of task-centeredness versus person-centeredness and categorizes the results into five leadership styles.  The Blake and Mouton Leadership Grid is a great tool for leaders and their individual development; it helps to build better leaders and more successful organizations.

Robert Blake and Jane Mouton developed a model of managerial behavior known as the Management Grid in the early 1960s, which has since been renamed the Leadership Grid.  It has been widely used in organizational training and development, and focuses on how leaders can help organizations reach their purposes (Northouse, 2013).  As mentioned above, the grid focuses on a leader’s concern for production (task-centeredness) and concern for people (person-centeredness).  The former describes the leader’s level of concern with achieving organizational objectives, and the latter represents the leader’s level of consideration of team members’ needs who are attempting to achieve the firm’s goals (Pennsylvania, 2014).  The levels are plotted on a nine-point scale on a dual axis grid, and the output illustrates the specific leadership style of the individual.

My college major is Organizational Leadership.  Working toward a future leadership position in my organization and simply being curious about the validity and usefulness of this tool, I completed the Leadership Grid Questionnaire (http://www.stellarleadership.com/docs/Leadership/assessment/Managerial%20Grid%20Questionnaire.pdf), which is the first step of the process.  The questionnaire consists of 18 statements to which I responded zero to five on a scale of the extent to which the statement applies to me (zero represents never and five represents always).  I transferred the numerical answers into two corresponding columns in a scoring section of the questionnaire.  A simple calculation was made, and my scores were converted into plots on the Leadership Grid.  The intersection of the horizontal and vertical lines drawn from these two points signifies the leadership dimension in which I normally operate.  This leadership style is one of five that is recognized by the Blake and Mouton model.

The results depicted on the Leadership Grid associate my score of 7,8 as a team management style of leadership (Northouse, 2013).  According to Blake and Mouton’s model, this style stresses the production needs and people needs highly and equally.  When both needs coincide, a team environment based on trust and respect is formed, and this leads to high satisfaction, motivation, and high production (The Blake Mouton Managerial Grid, 1996-2014).  Some descriptive words and phrases associated with this type of leader are: sets clear priorities, follows through, encourages participation, determined, open-minded (Northouse, 2013).  This result is great news to me, but I need to know how to apply it to my professional goals.

The Leadership Grid helps individuals to understand their natural tendencies and areas on which to improve as a leader.  According to the grid, my style of leadership, team management, produces the most successful leaders because it represents high levels of concern for both team and production (Pennsylvania, 2014).  Training programs based on the grid attempt to move leaders toward the team management style; however, it does not mean that these leaders are the most effective (Pennsylvania, 2014).  Although equally high levels of concern in both areas are generally accepted, different situations often demand different styles of leadership (The Blake Mouton Managerial Grid, 1996-2014).  For example, when morale is low in an organization, which is the case for my current employer, higher emphasis should be placed on people rather than production to result in more satisfied subordinates.  On the other hand, if a firm encounters a financial hardship, a focus on high production is warranted.

The style approach to leadership focuses on the behavior of the leader.  It examines their performance with regard to tasks and relationships, but it does not give recommendations for how leaders should act because their actions often depend on the situation.  Based on this leadership style, Blake and Mouton’s Leadership Grid is a useful tool to provide leaders with knowledge of their own style and to remind them that too much emphasis in one area at the expense of another can sometimes lead to low production (The Blake Mouton Managerial Grid, 1996-2014).  Understanding where I fall on the grid helps me to know how I regard production in relation to people, and areas on which I can improve to become a successful leader.

 

References:

Managerial Grid Questionnaire. (2010). Retrieved from http://www.stellarleadership.com/docs/Leadership/assessment/Managerial%20Grid%20Questionnaire.pdf

Northouse, P. G. (2013). Leadership: Theory and Practice (6th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA, SAGE Publications, Inc.

Pennsylvania State University World Campus, (2014). Lesson Commentary 5: Style and Situational Approaches. Retrieved February 14, 2014, from: https://courses.worldcampus.psu.edu/sp14/psych485/001/content/065_lesson/01_page.html

The Blake Mouton Managerial Grid (1996-2014). Retrieved from http://www.mindtools.com/pages/article/newLDR_73.htm

Can I Change My Personality to Become a Better Leader?

by

The trait approach has been frequently used to study leadership.  The supporters of this approach determined that the personality traits of good leaders are innate, not learned.  One of the most well-known models of personality is the Five Factor Model (FFM).  The FFM of personality includes the following broad dimensions:  conscientiousness, agreeableness, neuroticism, openness to experience, and extraversion (Pennsylvania State University).  Possessing some or all of these traits is a good indicator of a successful leader (Judge, Bono, Ilies, & Gerhardt, 2002), with extraversion being the greatest predictor of a post-interview job offer in a leadership position (Caliguiri, 2000).

My personality traits portray me as an introvert and not highly open to experience, so does that mean that I will not hold a leadership position in the future, or not be what is considered to be a good leader?  Since I am not best suited for a leadership position according to the trait approach, it made me wonder if I could alter my personality to increase the probability of my earning a leadership position.  Would I be able to fight genetics and the life experiences that shaped me into who I am today?  I turned to the trusty internet for some answers.

According to Carol Dweck, a psychologist at Stanford University, the static-character research that is based on the FFM doesn’t consider an in-between area (Bryner, 2007).  Dweck believes this area contains the fundamental beliefs that individuals develop as they grow.  She goes on to propose that two mindsets, fixed or growth, develop early in life and play a large part in personality, specifically motivation and achievement.  She claims that the unfixed traits are only beliefs and they can be changed.  As such, since beliefs can change, so can personalities.

I found another article that described one’s personality as being partially genetic.  Experiences also help to form our personalities; they change our minds, actions, and feelings (Goodman, 2012).  The article also went on state that our “Big 5” personality traits (FFM) change over time.  These changes are actually responses to normal life transitions.  It asserts that if we can challenge our pattern of thinking, feeling, and behaving, and make those changes permanent, then our personality will be altered.  An example provided in the article is an exercise to help one become more extroverted.  If I, being an introvert, were to enter a social setting, pretend that I felt perfectly comfortable, and challenged my pattern of behavior by initiating a conversation with a stranger, that I would eventually develop new patterns and become more sociable and assertive.

Since I cannot change my genetics or past experiences to alter my personality in the present, I see no harm in performing exercises like the one mentioned in Goodman’s article to help me in my career in the future.  Forcing myself into different environments will provide me with new and varied experiences which will, in turn, affect my personality.  Like Goodman’s article suggests, I can “fake it ‘til (I) make it” (Goodman 2012), and continue to challenge myself to improve my sociability and openness to experience.  In turn, this will help me become a better leader in the future.

 

References:

Bryner, J. (2007). Study: Your Personality Can Change (and Probably Should). Live Science. Retrieved from http://www.livescience.com/9507-study-personality-change.html

Caliguiri, P. M. (2000).  The Big Five Personality Characteristics as Predictors of Expatriate’s Desire to Terminate the Assignment and Supervisor-Rated Performance. Personnel Psychology, 53(1), 67-68.

Goodman, N. (2012). Can You Actually Change Your Personality? Mother Nature Network. Retrieved from http://www.mnn.com/health/fitness-well-being/stories/can-you-actually-change-your-personality

Judge, T. A., Bono, J. E., Ilies, R., & Gerhardt, M. W. (2002).  Personality and Leadership: A Qualitative and Quantitative Review. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(4), 765-780.

Pennsylvania State University World Campus. (2014). Lesson Commentary 2: Trait Approach.  Retrieved from https://courses.worldcampus.psu.edu/sp14/psych485/001/content/02_lesson/01_page.html

Skip to toolbar