Leadership

PSYCH 485 blog

We all have a “least preferred coworker”

by

While reading Lesson 6, on Contingency and Path Theories, one topic stood out, the Least Preferred Coworker Scale. Fiedler developed this scale in 1967 as a way to find if a leader is more task oriented or relationship oriented (PSU, 2018). This scale asks the leader to think of their most difficult coworker they have ever worked with, and then rate that coworker on a multiple question scale that is then transformed into a numerical score. The low-LPC (least preferred coworker) leaders are more task oriented, while the high-LPC leaders are more relationship oriented, while those in the middle can switch between being task and relationship oriented (PSU, 2018). In this blog, we’re going to look at an example of the LPC test and then examine the results from myself and my boyfriend.

When we look at Fiedler’s test, we find that there are two extremes for each prompt, such as pleasant and unpleasant or supportive and hostile, with a rating between 1 and 8. There are between 8 to 20 questions per test (Least Preferred Coworker Scale.PDF., n.d.). There were multiple online examples of the LPC scales online but the one I found at https://cyfar.org/sites/default/files/Least_PreferredCoworkerScale.pdf seemed the most robust and inclusive. On changingminds.org, they expanded on the test saying that each prompt is rating multiple things. The test rates the Leader-Member Relations, which is rating the support that the leader has from their followers (Fiedler’s Least Preferred Co-worker (LPC) Theory., n.d.). The Task Structure explores if tasks are standardised, documented and controlled (Fiedler’s Least Preferred Co-worker (LPC) Theory., n.d.) and the Leader’s Position-Power is the leader’s ability to assess performance and give rewards or punishment (Fiedler’s Least Preferred Co-worker (LPC) Theory., n.d.). This seems rather robust inference for the 18 scales that I rated a former classmate against! Changingminds.org continued about the LPC scores, that the best leaders are a mixture of all three above qualities, the leader-member relations, task structure, and leader’s position-power. The site continues that the high LPC score leader, the relationship-leader, is best when leader-member relations aren’t the best unless it’s an unstructured task they’re trying to accomplish and the leader is weak. That’s when a low LPC score leader is better, a task oriented leader (Fiedler’s Least Preferred Co-worker (LPC) Theory., n.d.). The site also gives us a chart that shows the correlation between the different questions and the leader’s attributes, along with which is most effective. You’ll see a screenshot of the chart below. Sadly, I do not have access to the exact questionnaire used in the chart, as the chart only has 8 questions and I have 18 in the above provided scale.

For the scale linked above, it explains that we’re examining our dominate leadership style and that this is a fixed part of our personality. With Fiedler’s contingency views, it’s good to match leaders styles and situations, using LPC as a tool (Least Preferred Coworker Scale.PDF., n.d.). If you score above a 73, you’re considered a high LPC, where you’re a relationship oriented leader. If you’re below a 64, you’re a task-oriented leader. If you’re between a 65 and 72, you’re a mixture of both, where you’re to determine which style is most like you (Least Preferred Coworker Scale.PDF., n.d.), not exactly as scientific as I was hoping in the description. I took the scale and received a 48, which means that I am a task-oriented leader. I’m not going to disagree with that. Typically, I don’t care for people and I loathe working in a group because I hate depending on others for my success (or failure). When I approach working with others and subordinates, I really do wait to see their performance before I decide if I like them. Our lesson says that us low-LPC leaders are motivated by the accomplishment of the tasks, then our secondary motivation is building a relationship with the followers (PSU, 2018). This seems rather spot-on for me! My boyfriend scored a 66, which is in the middle ground but on the lower side. He is a mortgage lender, so he has a lot of different types of working relationships, from realtors, to other bankers, to the underwriters and processors that he works with on a daily basis. He feels that he mainly focuses on building a relationship with the coworkers and followers, and then fostering the tasks comes secondary, much like the high-LPC leader. He feels like the high-LPC model is inefficient because because the leader is wasting their time if the person they are fostering the relationship with does not have the skill set to accomplish the task. He elaborated that his perception as a middle-LPC leader that what he chooses to do when working with a new person also pertains to how quickly the task needs to be accomplished. If the task requires a quick turnaround in performance, the relationship building comes secondary. When I asked him about be beginnings of his best working relationships, he said that he has the best relationships with the employees and coworkers are with those who are excellent performers, as he has less of relationship with those who cannot perform their tasks.

All in all, Fiedler’s scale is pretty neat. It helps us discover our beliefs about people, if we see  others as positive or negative, and see if we’re task or people oriented (Fiedler’s Least Preferred Co-worker (LPC) Theory., n.d.). I felt like my low-LPC score was very appropriate, while my middle-scoring beau was in practice also, right in the middle. These sort of scales are fascinating because they are sort of a personality test, and it would have been exceptionally fascinating to have the table above to correspond to the test we took here!

Resources:

Fiedler’s Least Preferred Co-worker (LPC) Theory. (n.d.). Retrieved November 25, 2018, from http://changingminds.org/disciplines/leadership/theories/fiedler_lpc.htm

Least Preferred Coworker Scale.PDF. (n.d.). Retrieved November 25, 2018, from https://cyfar.org/sites/default/files/Least_PreferredCoworkerScale.pdf

Pennsylvania State University World Campus. (2018). PSYCH 485 Lesson 6: Contingency and Path Theories. Retrieved November 25, 2018 from https://psu.instructure.com/courses/1942231/modules/items/25010818

Servant Leadership – A Music Festival of Compassion

by

Starting in middle school, I attended mission trips to children’s homes Monterrey and Tijuana, Mexico. I would forego my privileged middle-class life for a few weeks at a time to scrub filthy toilets, strip and refinish dilapidated donated furniture, revitalize faded beloved murals, and create renovation plans for these homes. The children were not all orphans, so we called these places children’s homes instead of orphanages. The funding was scarce for these homes and they never turned down a child that needed a place to be, so understandably, these weren’t the best living conditions. This was my first introduction to servant leadership, where I had to take over a project and complete it in the time with some help from my fellow travelers. Our lesson describes servant leadership akin to parents raising their children in a servant like manner, by focusing on them and raising them as healthy-adults, which allows the children to grow up to do the same for their children (PSU, 2018). Fast forwarding to today, I am the head of a group called Karuna30A. We’re not an organization or a 501c3, but just a group of people who like to do good things. We are throwing a huge Christmas music festival with 12 bands, two stages, silent auction and raffle, pictures with Santa, sleigh rides, and so much more, for only one reason. Our neighbors are hurting after Hurricane Michael, so we are raising money for our local United Way and Toys for Tots. This is the third event that I have created, the first was a music festival for the American Himalayan Foundation after the horrific earthquake in Nepal in 2015, and one for a local musician who fell deathly ill. I have been the leader for all three of these events, which has only happened through servant leadership. I’m hoping that I can utilize some of these skills as this event comes together.

Our text defines servant leadership as desiring to serve first, and that inspires leadership (Northouse, 2019). These leaders have ten characteristics, listening, empathy, healing, awareness, persuasion, conceptualization, foresight, stewardship, commitment to the growth of people, and building community (Northouse, 2019). There are many different key characteristics of the servant leadership listed in the text, but most revolve around those 10 principles. In order to be effective and become a servant leader, the leadership-sphere has to be relevant for the times, me taking the reins for a fundraiser after Hurricane Michael set me up quite well in this respect. There are also leader attributes and follower receptivity, both of these fell into place for this event. I have organized many other events and I know how to delegate tasks so my helpers feel like they are making a difference so I have the skill set and the list of people who are excited to help, my followers.  

When it comes to behaviors, I conceptualized all of the events we have planned and basically got it rolling through to the day that the event happens, which I then turn over to my volunteers to do their part. By having this event, it helps our community heal a little more. As we drive to work and school, we still see sailboats on land, trees uprooted, neighborhoods entirely covered with blue tarp roofs, people living in tent cities, and businesses destroyed. Any sense of normalcy and helping others right now is very cathartic. I’m standing with my followers who want to help, I’m standing by my communities who need the help, and by the communities that want to provide the help. One thing that I always try to do is helping my followers succeed and grow, as well as empower them. One of my favorite things to do is to assign someone a task, and tell them that I trust their judgement and I know they will do a great job! I found that when I trusted a helper with an entire task without micromanaging, they really do an excellent job and they take great pride in the task! The last thing that I believe this group of events has allowed me to do is to create value for the community. Not only do I help a group of people come together to make this event happen, I also help members of the community come to an event, donate toys to kids in need, and also have a great holiday centric event for their family. Not only do they get this Christmas spirit from the activities, but also their participation helps those who are still displaced months after the hurricane.

Northouse says that effective servant leaders develop a long term relationship with their followers (2019). I hope to continue this tradition as Karuna30A started back in 2015 and we’re still going strong with more followers and attendees RSVPing on the Facebook event each day and liking our Karuna30A Facebook page. We never accept money for payment for doing this event, and I’m 100% transparent in what we need to get to accomplish our goals, with all sponsorships going towards paying location fees directly so we remain ethical.

So, what have I learned from this lesson? Basically, keep doing what I’m doing. By having a cause that I love, I’m devoted to the event, I have a great group of helpers that see my vision. I enable those followers to have confidence in the tasks they perform, and I hold myself and the volunteers to the highest ethical standards. Not only are we creating community within my volunteers, but also within the actual community to bring assistance to our neighbors in need after Hurricane Michael. Northouse says that the outcome of servant leadership is that my followers have greater self-actualization, they do their assigned work, and encourages the followers to become servant leaders too (2019). Nikki, one of my main volunteers, has really stepped up during this event to help me as I work full time, go to school full time, and I am organizing this event. She started as our staff photographer on the first event, and she has taken the initiative to really excel on this third event. Northouse also talks about the organizational performance under servant leadership, where the team is more effective and they go above and beyond the requests made of them (2019). I found this especially true where my volunteer crew is excited to volunteer their time to pick up donations, orchestrate drop offs, and volunteer their business’ resources as sponsors. Through this project, we are going to have a great societal impact, which Northouse mentions is a positive impact on society (2019). The first two events we held raised over $25,000 and this third event is going to be the most successful!

So, unbeknownst to me, I lead in a servant leadership manner for my Karuna30A events. I do lead by other methods for different situations though! Due to the nature of what Karuna does, spreading loving compassion to those in need, it seems like a perfect leadership model. I am able to encourage my volunteers to do their work and grow, I’m able to make an impact with the volunteers and the beneficiaries of the event, I’m able to act in the utmost ethical way, and have a great time helping those who need help the most.

Resources:
Northouse, P.G. (2019). Leadership: Theory and practice (Eighth Edition). Los Angeles, CA: Sage.
Pennsylvania State University World Campus. (2018). PSYCH 485 Lesson 11: Servant Leadership. Retrieved from https://psu.instructure.com/courses/1942231/modules/items/25010892

We’re Just Trying to Dominate Our Careers Like Any Man

by

“You can grow up to be anything you want to be, do anything you want to do, and I know you’re do great things because you’re you.” – My mom.

I’m very fortunate. I never knew that it was a disadvantage to be female growing up. I was never taught that certain toys were for girls, certain toys were for boys, to let the boys win, or that I had to be a housewife and raise a brood of children. I come from a long lineage of strong working women. They didn’t go to college, they did not receive managerial statuses, but they worked. Hard. They worked with people that were different than them, different races, religions, and cultures. My mother was a high level administrator for Proctor and Gamble, and she was exposed to unnumbered cultures during her nearly four decades at the corporation. I loved meeting the people she worked with like Ranjit, the Indian chemist and Magda, the Egyptian microbiologist who became my mentor. There were very intelligent and powerful women of all cultures creating some of P&G’s most revolutionary and profitable products, so why was I to think that I, as a female, couldn’t do that?

I watched an amazing documentary called “Feminists: What were they thinking” on Netflix a few weeks ago, and it rattled me in a great way. I was listening to all of these powerful feminist activists talk about their mothers, almost every single one was raised to think that women are no different than men in our abilities, we are not inferior, we are not subservient to men. After I watched the documentary, I called my mother to tell her that she raised the way that the women I admired were raised. She chuckled and said, “Well honey, it’s all so true.”

“We’ve begun to raise daughters more like sons… but few have the courage to raise our sons more like our daughters.” – Gloria Steinem (Northouse, pg 412, 2019).

Our lesson talks about glass ceilings, which are beliefs that women do not have the training, skill, experience, or personal capacity for executive positions (PSU, 2018), which is ridiculous. We hold 57% of bachelor’s degrees, 60% of master’s degrees, and over 50% of doctoral degrees (Northouse, 2019), so to say that we don’t have the training is a moot point. While there are some women that want to take the “mommy-track” of a delayed or stunted career to care for their family, there are also some men out there that do the same but they don’t get a demeaning title like “daddy-track” following them around. If a woman wants to have a family and take time off to rear their young, that’s great, but there are a lot of professional women who want a family but don’t want to jeopardize the career they have worked so hard for.

I never thought that the difficulties that women faced in the past would still be prevalent today. Sometimes, men just don’t think that women are as good at their jobs as men. In an article from Sydney, Australia, a 33-year old flight instructor gets a lot of doubts from the men that fly with her, “Sometimes we get older guys coming through, who might say ‘I’m not flying with a girl!’ but then they go flying and say ‘Oh actually, she was really safe and a really good pilot’” (The sky not quite the limit for women in workforce, 2017). This is a blatant example of gender prejudice, where many people think that an effective leader has to be a man (PSU, 2018).

So what can be done about it? Well, we can try to redefine what makes good women leaders, but that’s a very slow process. In a paper by Lynn D. Leiber, she suggested a few tactics in hiring for a diverse workforce that could not only increase the number of women hired in upper management and executive positions, but also creating a culturally diverse workforce. She suggested that employers search outside of their normal searches for new employees, masking personal information on resumes so the recruiter doesn’t know if the applicant is female, male, African-American, or any other culture that can be assessed by their name, posting jobs on websites that women and people of color search, recruit at campuses with more minorities and speak to potential female recruits, and utilize recruiting firms that have a strong diversity protocol (Leiber, 2012).

 

Resources:

Demetrakas, J. (Director). (2014). Feminists: What were they thinking [Motion picture on
Netflix]. United States: Crazy Wisdom Films.

Lieber, L. D. (2012), Considerations for attracting and retaining a qualified, diverse workforce. Empl. Rel. Today, 38: 85-92. doi:10.1002/ert.20369

Northouse, P.G. (2019). Leadership: Theory and practice (Eighth Edition). Los Angeles, CA: Sage.

Pennsylvania State University World Campus. (2018). PSYCH 485 Lesson 13: Leadership and
 Diversity. Retrieved from https://psu.instructure.com/courses/1942231/modules
 /items/25010913

The sky not quite the limit for women in workforce. (2017, March 6). Sydney Morning Herald
 [Sydney, Australia], p. 8. Retrieved from http://link.galegroup.com.ezaccess.libraries.
psu.edu/apps/doc/A484031426/GIC?u=psucic&sid=GIC&xid=2e7ce281

The Tale of Two Assistants, a Style and Situational Experience

by

This is a true story but the names have been changed to protect, well… Harriet.

Harper is a very successful mortgage lender. He has been in the banking industry for over a decade and enjoys his field. After a few hard years starting up as a mortgage lender, he now has more than enough volume to need an assistant. His first assistant, Sarah, was great, but sadly she chose to quit after having a child. His second assistant, Harriet, was not as successful.

His first assistant, Sarah, was a go-getter. She was excited to be working for Harper. She brought a great enthusiasm to the roll and although she was new to the mortgage world, she was ready to learn and make some great commissions. She was the quintessential developmental level four (D4), as she was willing and able to take on this new job (PSU WC, 2018 L. 5). She breezed through training and had no problem bringing innovation to Harper so he could focus on making more deals, attending closings, and actually enjoying nights and weekends without being glued to his laptop. He delegated tasks to Sarah and she had no problem completing the tasks and finding new things to do to help Harper achieve his lending goals, such as posting their VA lending details on military relocation groups on Facebook and ordering exciting closing gifts for his clients. Harper did not get involved with Sarah’s goal achievement and did not get heavily involved with her personal life. He enjoyed his delegating behavior and her D4 follower status (PSU WC, 2018 L. 5).  It seemed to be a great balance and Harper was very sad to hear that she wasn’t coming back after the birth of her daughter. His style was middle-of-the-road management, which is a balance of tasks and relationships. He preferred to avoid conflicts between Sarah and the other assistants, and while he knew that she was possibly going through a divorce and difficult pregnancy, he was not comfortable bringing that dynamic into their office relationship. He preferred to exchange pleasantries and discussions on the weather, than hear about drama occurring in her life. These middle-of-the-road managers want moderate levels of production and interpersonal relationships, which was a great situation for Sarah and Harper because he is so results driven. (PSU WC, 2018 L. 5)

Photo credit: One Virtual Global Business Solutions

After Sarah left, Harper had a difficult time finding a new assistant that was as detailed oriented as Sarah. Upon recommendation from his former assistant who is now a local bank branch manager, he hired Harriet. Harriet received more detailed training than Sarah not only from Harper but also the loan processing staff and underwriters upon Harper’s request. He was trying to get another Sarah working for him. Sadly, Harriet was not up to the task of being another Sarah, and in fact was not a good fit as his assistant at all. She was D2 follower status, where she was unable to complete the tasks, she unwilling to learn despite multiple training opportunities, and definitely was not confident in completing tasks (PSU WC, 2018 L. 5). He started with middle-of-the-road management with Harriet but over time he moved more towards impoverished management. He had invested so much time and training into Harriet without seeing any results. Harper even sat Harriet down to ask if he enjoyed working for him, what he could do to help her grasp what was needed for the position, and that she had two weeks to decide if this is the right position for her or not. After that conversation and she did not improve, he wasn’t concerned with the tasks that he assigned her or and there was no interpersonal relationship, including small talk in phone calls and office visits. As the impoverished manager, he became very laissez-faire about her entire employment, and became non-committal whenever she asked about future files. He became very resigned and apathetic whenever she would text him with file updates because he knew that the work was done incorrectly and he was going to have to redo a majority of every file she touched (PSU WC, 2018 L. 5). Sadly, coaching Harriet with a high-directive and high-supportive style needed for a D2 employee (PSU WC, 2018 L. 5) was not conducive for what Harper needed in an assistant or what he could supply as a manager due to the nature of his business. He even commented that he wasn’t sure what she did throughout the day when he wasn’t there to give her written instruction on how to do something he had trained her on during her first week of employment.

Sadly, the leader and follower dynamic did not work out between Harriet and Harper. Due to the restrictions on Harper’s time, he had a specific style of leadership behavior that was necessary for him to excel at his position and while Harriet did not do well under this style of leadership, Sarah flourished. Harper had to fire Harriet on Friday but thankfully, Sarah has decided that she missed working with Harper and has decided to come back as his assistant in two weeks. It’s unclear who is happier about Sarah’s return: Sarah, Harper, or Harper’s girlfriend who had to listen to the whole drama unfold.

Resources:

Pennsylvania State University World Campus. (2018). PSYCH 485 Lesson 5: Style and situational approaches. Retrieved from https://psu.instructure.com/courses/1942231/modules/items/25010808

 

Utilizing the Individual Self: A Path to Successful Leadership

by

Individuation is to divest the self of false wrappings. - Carl Jung

The psychodynamic approach has many strengths, such as a understanding between the relationship between a leader and their followers, the ability to cross cultural lines, the encouragement of personal growth, and encouragement of morality in leadership (L3, p.6, 2018). On the contrary, it is said that the approaches include that the theories were formulated on the severely mentally ill, based on two-parent families, not based on organizations, not well translated to training and it focuses too much on the individual. While the psychodynamic approach receives criticism of being too focused on the individual, possibly the individual focus is the approach’s greatest strength. This blog will focus on the weakness of the group dynamic, the strength of being an authentic leader, and the use of executive coaching, specifically diving into the shadow and the utilization of dream interpretation for leaders.

Once the leader is able to identify their authentic self and mature into their individuation, they are able to become stronger leaders in their organizations. When a group is gathered, there is a dynamic that is quickly created subconsciously that is a silent group of rules that govern how things are done within that set of people and that can limit their behavior and even their innovation (Vince, 2011). These unspoken rules directly relate to how the followers learn from each other and the leader, which is a play between fantasy and reality, which is the psychodynamic approach (Vince, 2011), a person’s subconscious speaking from past experience that is affecting their lives and group interactions today. Our collective unconscious morphs into mental images of how we think our group or organization is supposed to work (Vince 2011) so it makes sense to look at leading these groups from an elevated platform, which is taking the group dynamic out of the equation. By focusing on the individual leader, we don’t have the expectations of how we’re supposed to act, how we’re supposed to relate to office politics, how we’re supposed to limit our innovation to stay within a role as the “architecture of the invisible” (Vince, 2011). This “architecture of the invisible” limits a group and a leader because of the group dynamic, because it sets an invisible rule book that everyone in the group is supposed to follow. By the leader getting individual training on psychodynamics, they are able to work with emotions of their group, engage with difficulties in their organization, and enhance their ability to learn (Vince, 2011). While training a group of leaders may be more time effective, it seems that having a competent leader who can steer the group’s collective unconscious is a huge asset to prevent misunderstanding of roles, of expectations, and encourage innovation in their organization because they can utilize each follower’s strength. If we break the individual leader out of a group dynamic for training, the leader can receive more effective training of their “self.”

Now that we can see the limitations of training in a group, let’s look at authenticity in leadership, a very individual approach to leadership training (Ladkin, 2016). Being an authentic leader means having self awareness and self regulation, and Jung says that an authentic leader isn’t necessarily perfect (Ladkin, 2016). Empirical research shows that leaders don’t feel that they can lead authentically because they translate that to staying positive and upbeat all of the time. In fact, that actually can cause inauthentic behavior (Ladkin, 2016). These leaders do not realize that by only projecting a happy face, they are probably projecting a lot of their shadow self onto their followers and creating a hazard within their organization but the leaders fear that by showing the shadows and difficulties, it makes them feel like a weak or ineffective leader (Ladkin, 2016). Basically, if leaders don’t own up to their own shortcomings, they are going to come out anyway. The leader can openly admit to their followers that a deal didn’t work out as they planned or they can sugar-coat the ruined deal with their followers commenting behind their back that upper management didn’t do very well. The thing is that these leaders are not trained individually to turn to their true selves during times of difficulty in work and they disconnect their values from the roles that they play in their job (Ladkin, 2016). When a leader is able to be trained in the complementary approach, where the leader is trained to work on their strengths next to our shadows, they are able to balance everything that makes them human, and this is not something that is able to be done alone (Ladkin, 2016). The leader needs some sort of one-on-one work to identify their shadows. Jung says that more than half of our lives are in a subconscious state and our individuation is a combination of our conscious and unconscious, but the most important thing is for us to be aware of our shadow because if we do not become aware, the repression could make the shadow stronger (Ladkin, 2016). By working individually with a coach, a leader can accept their failures as learning experiences, rather than signs of weakness or failures (Ladkin, 2016). Ladkin says that “Ignoring one’s shadow and avoiding the hard work of becoming an individuated person creates leaders who are deluded about who they really are” (2016). So by focusing on the individual leader, specifically one who focuses on their shadows, research shows that you are creating a leader who has greater responsibility within the organization, treats their followers better, and approaches their work with greater morality (Ladkin, 2016). A group setting would be inappropriate and ineffective for this deep sort of shadow work, where the leader must really dig deep into who they are to identify their shortcomings and then create a game plan with a knowledgeable coach to work on these shadows.

So, what else can a coach do to help the individual leader become more effective? Having a business coach used to be a sign of failure or weakness of the leader but as business changes so quickly, and leaders are under more pressure than ever, having a executive coach is a status symbol to encourage high-performers and high-achievers to keep going, and basically essential for these leaders (Kets, 2014). My boyfriend pays $1500 a month for his executive sales coach because he knows that his coach keeps him at peak-performance, just like a Serena Williams still has a coach, even though she is one of the best tennis players in the world. While executive coaches use many methods, they all focus specifically on one executive not a group, which is why they are so expensive. They are not affiliated with the companies and provide an impartial sounding board for the leader. Kets says, “Metaphorically speaking, many leaders are like swans, floating stately and serene on the water but paddling like crazy under the surface” (2014). There are many stresses in a leaders life, including that when a leader climbs the corporate ladder, there are less opportunities for feedback on their performance. This can be detrimental if they do not have someone to guide them like an executive coach whose main role is to help the leader have self-awareness (Kets, 2014) and that can mean addressing their shadow self as well.

One of the techniques that executive coaches use has deep roots in the psychodynamic approach: oneirology, the study of dreams. Freud said that dreams are the road to the unconscious, where all of our fears and deepest desires reside, along with our repressed childhood memories. Jung had a more forward approach to dreams, saying that it is a connection to the collective unconscious which connects all of humanity through archetypes (Kets, 2014). When the coaches understand Freud’s theories and Jung’s archetypes, its a path to understand their client’s psyche a bit deeper. By having this ticket to the leader’s inner-theater, the coaches are able to see more into their client’s lives, what their struggles are, their challenges, and what is in the forefront of their mind, including solutions for their problems (Kets, 2014). Evolutionary psychologists say that dreams are a way for us to practice our fight-or-flight response where we can practice threat avoidance, and practice problem solving in a safe place that isn’t apparent when we’re awake (Kets, 2014). Kets gives many examples of how these dream interpretations are applicable to coaching. One example was of a CEO who dreamt of being caught naked outside of his home with only a washcloth to cover himself and found his wallet on the ground without any money in it as his neighbors pointed and laughed at him. From the dream, he and his coach was able to identify that he was very anxious about a presentation to the board that he knew was not going to go well. He felt exposed and was concerned about the board’s repercussions from the content of the meeting (2014). Kets also told of a woman who dreamt of being caught under a rock avalanche and as soon as she was able to dig herself out a little bit, more rock would tumble upon her. She was able to identify through her coach that she was feeling that her progress in her position was being thwarted by her coworkers (2014). Once the leader is courageous and brave enough to share their dreams with their coach they are revealing things about themselves that may never come up in a regular coaching session (Kets, 2014). Utilizing this psychodynamic approach, the coach is able to ask the leader how a dream made them feel, ask about any intensification of emotions during or after the dream, if there is a recurrent theme in their dreams or thoughts after the dream occurred (Kets, 2014). This allows the coach to have a fuller story to work on shadows with their client, and reinforce positive changes.

As mentioned, the individualistic nature of the psychodynamic approach is not going to be the cheapest or most efficient way to train an entire corporation’s leadership team. However, the concern that this approach concentrates on the singular leader is probably it’s greatest strength. When groups gather, they create a subconscious group of rules of how they are supposed to act, based on their own past experiences. By breaking the leader out from a group setting, they can focus solely on their own growth without traversing unspoken rules within a group. One that leader is broken from the group, they can work on their shadow self, the things that aren’t the best parts of themselves, and work on that along with their shining moments with a coach. Having an coach to help the leader in an unbiased manner allows the leader to grow and receive feedback to become a better leader and version of themselves. Utilizing other psychodynamic techniques such as the study of the leader’s dreams can untap subconscious concerns, solutions to problems, and even allow their coaches to understand them a bit better in their everyday relations. So while the criticism lies that this approach is too focused on the individual leader, there is a mountain of support for this single person approach to leadership training.   

 

References:

Kets, d. V. (2014). Dream journeys: A new territory for executive coaching.Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research, 66(2), 77-92. doi:http://dx.doi.org.ezaccess.libraries.psu.edu/10.1037/cpb0000004

Ladkin, D., Spiller, C., Craze, G. (2016). The journey of individuation: A Jungian alternative to the theory and practice of leading authentically. Leadership, Vol 14, Issue 4, pp. 415 – 434.
doi: https://doi-org.ezaccess.libraries.psu.edu/10.1177/1742715016681942

Pennsylvania State University. (2018). Lesson 3: Psychodynamic Approach. Leadership in work — PSYCH 485. Online course lesson, Penn State World Campus Retrieved September 6, 2018 from https://psu.instructure.com/courses/1942231/modules/items/25010767

Vince, R. (2011). The spatial psychodynamics of management learning. Management Learning. Vol 42, Issue 3, pp. 333 – 347.
doi: https://doi-org.ezaccess.libraries.psu.edu/10.1177/1350507610389954

Skip to toolbar