Leadership

PSYCH 485 blog

Teachers: It Takes All Kinds

by

As students, we have had all kinds of teachers. Some we liked; some we didn’t. Why is it, for some classes, we want more of a Path-Goal style leader, others a more Team style leader, and even others a Transactional leader? Let’s take a look.

Under the Path-Goal theory, a good leader rewards the followers with a reward, or the goal, while removing obstacles in the way, or the path (Williams, 2015). This type of leader is very dynamic as the group or individual being led is also dynamic. For this type of teacher to be effective, they need to help the followers by giving them what is missing in their environment and help them compensate for deficiencies in their abilities (Northouse, 2016). Teachers at most levels plan out their lessons ahead of time not only to be sure that the curriculum is covered but also plan for what will be needed within each class. The basic questions a teacher asks themselves when planning a lesson are:

  • What is the topic of the lesson?
  • What do I want the students to learn?
  • What do I want them to understand and to be able to do at the end of class?
  • What do I want them to take away from a particular lesson? (Milkova, 2015)

This class has a road map within each online lesson which lets us students know where we are going and what topics will be covered as well as what assignments to anticipate. I use this road map to plan my own path of study throughout the week. Without it, I would be doing a lot of last minute panicking and my learning would be chaotic. This plan can also be modified as needed. Another class I have this semester had its schedule modified this year, but it was too late to modify the layout of the online lessons. Each week, he reminds the students of the actual plan for the week and what might need added or ignored. The ultimate goal is the successful passing of the class; the teacher is the one who guides the student to that goal by providing the direction needed along the path.

Team style leadership is a bit different. While a group has interaction and influence on each other, a team is more interdependent (Williams, 2015). Like on a hockey team, the goalie relies on the defense to try to keep the puck away from the goal; the defense relies on the forwards to keep the puck in the other team’s end and score goals. Without one aspect of that team, it would all fall apart. This class has had components of team activity with the movie projects. Within those assignments, the teacher wasn’t the leader. Like a team, our grade was dependent how each one of us did together. If we couldn’t agree on a topic or be able to blend our thoughts into a cohesive paper, then we would fall apart and our grade would suffer. Some classes are like that. The instructor gives the singular direction and relies upon the class as a team to get the assignments done. The higher level classes tend to be more like this than introductory classes. The assumption that the students already know the basics and the teachers are like coaches toward the end goal.

The final method is the transactional leader. Some of this style has been apparent in classes I have taken online. This happens when teachers and students only come together for an exchange of information with little interaction between. At the beginning of the week, the assignment is given with a deadline. The student turns in the assignment by that deadline. A grade is given with no feedback. The interaction is completed until the next assignment. I am sure that further interaction and feedback is available, but only if the student seeks it out.  This method exists out in the real world. The tasks are laid out by management; the task is completed; you get a paycheck as a reward. Growth and progress aren’t going to be forthcoming from this type of leadership.

Throughout an educational career, as well as a professional one later on, you will encounter a great variety of leaders. Some will help you along your way; others will not impede you, but they won’t do much to encourage you.

References:

Northouse, P. (2016) Leadership: Theory and Practice. Washington DC: Sage Publications.

Stiliana, M. (2015) Strategies of Effective Lesson Planning. Ann Arbor: The Regents of the University of Michigan. Retrieved 8 Nov 2015 from http://www.crlt.umich.edu/gsis/p2_5

Williams, J. (2015) PSYCH 485: Leadership in the Workplace. University Park: Penn State University. Retrieved 8 Nov 2015 from https://courses.worldcampus.psu.edu/fa15/psych485/001/content/09_lesson/03_page.html

 

Leaders on the Field

by

In the arena of American football, there is one recognized leader: the head coach. The relationship between these leaders and their teams is important for a successful season. By definition alone, the Leader-Member Exchange is a focus on the dyadic relationship between the leader and their followers (Northouse, 2016). This is only one of the leadership theories that are applicable to the arena of professional sports. Under the Path-Goal theory, sports teams are ruled by the need for achievement-oriented leadership. This is defined as a leader who sets a high standard of excellence for followers and seeks continuous improvement (Northouse, 2016).

These two theories, in this scenario, go very much hand-in-hand. Achievement-oriented leaders expect a lot from their followers, but if they don’t have a good relationship with their followers, their words and directions will fall on semi-deaf ears. The leaders could also have an excellent relationship with their followers, but if they don’t have a high enough standard or don’t give the right direction to the team, they won’t achieve much.

In the NFL, results are the benchmark of success. More often than not, when the team doesn’t perform, the coach (and sometimes the General Manager) is fired. Last year alone, four coaches were fired from the NFL: Jim Harbaugh from the 49ers, Mike Smith from the Falcons, Marc Trestman with GM Phil Emery from the Bears, and Rex Ryan with GM John Idzik from the NY Jets (Burke and Farrar, 2014). Three of those teams had losing records; the 49ers and Harbaugh parted company on mutual agreement after an 8-8 season. At the end of every season, at least one coach or manager is unemployed due to the team’s performance.

My Pittsburgh Steelers have only had three head coaches since 1969. Chuck Noll’s four Super Bowl wins over six seasons granted him leave during the late 1980s when the team, to tell it from a fan’s perspective, sucked. He even won Coach of the Year in 1989 because he took a low talent team who spectacularly lost their first two games to the second round of the playoffs. His successor in 1991, Bill Cowher, started off strong and kept the team going to the playoffs, including a Super Bowl win, almost every year. After Bill’s retirement, Mike Tomlin has been guiding the team to post-season appearances almost every year since, including a Super Bowl win making him the youngest man to head coach and win one in NFL history (www.steelers.com). This consistency in leadership has led to the Steelers being held as role models for other teams to follow.

The Steelers coaches and management have a very good relationship with their players and have had a record for supporting the players off the field. I am not talking about those in the news lately with criminal issues. I am speaking of keeping Aaron Smith on the roster when he was out for the season in order to maintain his health insurance so his son who had leukemia could maintain his treatments. I am speaking of making sure there was a spot open for Rocky Bleier, first drafted by the Steelers in 1968 and then drafted by the US Army in 1969, who came back with a potentially football-career ending foot injury from a shrapnel grenade to play in four Super Bowl wins (maryrose, 2009). Both of these stories and others you don’t hear about are because the Steelers leadership is just like that with their players.

Relationship notwithstanding, the goals of any sports team is to win. With a league topping six Super Bowl wins, the Steelers have proven that not only are they a team with a good leader/follower relationship, but they have high standards of excellence and demand only the best from their players. That has led to a respect of and near reverence to the franchise by players like Rod Woodson and Kordell Stewart, who left the team to go elsewhere but came back to retire a Steeler. This showing of leadership is also reflexive to the NFL as the name Rooney is well respected throughout the league. The sportsmanship award for the NFL is named after founder Art Rooney, Sr. Commissioner Roger Goodell said at the award unveiling, “Art Rooney is an iconic figure in NFL history. It is appropriate that we honor his legacy in this way and recognize NFL players for one of the important values that he represented so well.” (Bouchette, 2015)

Since 1933, the Rooneys have owned and managed the team with its ups and downs, and to this day remains a steadfast example that the LMX theory combined with achievement-oriented leadership produces not only one of the best known and best loved teams worldwide, but a winning one to be studied and imitated throughout the sport.

 

References:

Northouse, P. (2016) Leadership: Theory and Practice. Washington DC: Sage Publications. pp. 159, 180.

Burke, C. and Farrar, D. (29 Dec 2014). NFL Black Monday Tracker 2014. Sports Illustrated online. Retrieved 24 Oct 2015 from http://www.si.com/nfl/2014/12/29/nfl-black-monday-coaches-fired-tracker?page=3&devicetype=default

Steelers official Website (n.d.) Mike Tomlin Biography. Retrieved 24 Oct 2015 from http://www.steelers.com/team/coaches/mike-tomlin/4bf07eef-17d9-4b67-b634-c20700be0670

maryrose (19 Aug 2009). 40 Years Ago Today in Steelers History: Rocky Bleier Fights Back. Behind the Steel Curtain. Retrieved 24 Oct 2015 from http://www.behindthesteelcurtain.com/2009/8/19/990365/40-years-ago-today-in-steelers

Bouchette, E. (22 Jan 2015) NFL sportsmanship award named in honor of Steelers founder Art Rooney Sr. Pittsburgh Post-Gazette. Retrieved 24 Oct 2015 from http://www.post-gazette.com/sports/steelers/2015/01/22/NFL-sportsmanship-award-Pittsburgh-Steelers-founder-Art-Rooney-Sr/stories/201501220271

Spotlight or Limelight — Which makes the better leader?

by

In society, there will always be people who stand in the spotlight saying “Look at me!”, and there will be people who are in the limelight that helped the team achieve the goal. There are those who guide the whole group toward the goal with subtle hints and suggestions, and those who charge ahead like John Wayne, taking the reins and telling the group how it’s going to be.

When thinking of spotlight leaders, the narcissist comes to mind. Freud summarized as behaviors that range from normal self-interest to pathological self-absorption (Northouse, 2016). Spotlight people also tend to be the Warrior archetype. He or she imposes their will on the group because it is all about them (Williams, 2015). Their name goes on the front cover of the final report. While male leaders are generally categorized into this type, women are not immune to narcissism. For example, the characters of Gordon Gekko from the movie Wall Street and Miranda Priestly from the novel/movie The Devil Wears Prada definitely fall into the category of spotlight people.

When thinking of limelight leaders, they are the ones who are behind the scenes, orchestrating the team. They are more the Magician archetype. They change and adapt so that the team’s goals are achieved (Williams, 2015). They are the type of leader that might not have their name on the letterhead, but they are the ones people come to when something needs fixed, corrected, or generally figured out. They are the ones whose advice is sought when a problem is presented. Goals are achieved; problems are rectified. The limelight leader will sit back and smile knowing that good work was done by all.

It must be understood that there can be a behind-the-scenes leader that is also a narcissist. These are more of your puppet-master type leaders. Karl Rove has been accused of being this type of leader during the tenure of George W. Bush, even mentioned as being the architect during Bush’s 2004 victory speech in regard to his orchestration of many campaigns including his own gubernatorial and presidential as well as many others.

Whether a leader prefers to be in the spotlight or in the limelight, it is up the team to determine which one is actually the better leader.

References:

Northouse, P. (2016) “Leadership: Theory and Practice.” Washington DC: Sage Publications. pp. 353.

Williams, J. (2015) “Archetypes.” Lesson 3: Psychodynamic Approach. Retrieved from Lesson 3: Psychodynamic Approach

Bush, G. (3 Nov 2004) “Victory Speech”. Washington DC. Text retrieved from The Guardian George W Bush 2004 Victory Speech

Breaking Leadership Stereotypes

by

Stephanie Reynolds
PSYCH 485
Dr. Williams

In many areas of this course so far, the people behind the leadership roles have been categorized into males and females. It was mentioned in another blog post that women take care and men take charge. Boiled down to its essence, it means that men should be in charge in the workplace while women are only working to take care of their families. I find this perception offensive and demeaning not only to women but men as well.

Our textbook speaks of emotional intelligence and five main factors of leadership (Northouse, 2016). In this reading, while gender is mentioned in passing, it is not the focus of the actual definitions. In fact, the factors are extremely genderless and broad. It is us who associate particular traits, such as assertiveness with men and compassion with women, to a gender.

Are we as a society telling men that they are bad leaders because they care for the people they work for? Are we telling women they are bad leaders because they take a job where they are away from their families for lengthy periods of time?

Society is coming around more with the institution of laws and policies where either gender can take leave under the FMLA, although you will still find an exponentially larger proportion of women taking this leave over men.  A 2000 study by the Department of Labor found that 42.6 % of men “did not take leave because of a concern their job advancement may be hurt.” Another 31% “feared they would lose their jobs.” (Rossiter, 2009)

We as a society need to break the stereotypical thinking in the workplace. Each individual brings their own uniqueness, skills, and insight to the table. While I am speaking of gender in this post, the same things apply to race, ethnicity, sexual orientation/presentation and religion. We as a society need to stop living with the mindset of fixed gender roles and embrace what each individual has to contribute to society.

References:

Northouse, P. (2016) “Leadership: Theory and Practice.” Washington DC: Sage Publications. pp. 58-59.

Rossiter,  M. (Dec 2009) “FMLA: Is It Equally Beneficial to Today’s Dads?” Retrieved from https://www.legalzoom.com/articles/fmla-is-it-equally-beneficial-for-todays-dads

Skip to toolbar