After reading this week’s lesson and text, I wanted to share my experience as a woman in leadership.  I have worked at my current employer for 17 years.  In my time, I have held the role of individual contributor, but the majority of my time has been spent in a position of leadership.  Reflecting back on my journey, I experienced a great deal of the obstacles outlined in the lesson and text.  The overwhelming majority of leaders at my organization are men.  Up to a point, all of my direct supervisors had also been men.  There was a period of time where I was applying for promotions, and each time the male hiring manager offered the position to another male.  While I can understand the idea that maybe I was just not qualified, or the other person interviewed better and all the other “feedback” I was offered if we were simply speaking to results and performance, I was better on paper.  It was not until I was placed on the team of a female leader that I was given my first promotion.  After some time, I began to look for my next position, the same pattern continued.  In fact, thinking through my entire career, I can only refer to two times I was awarded a position by a male authority that was responsible for the hiring decision.   

In my industry, there is certainly a disproportionate distribution of female leaders as compared to male.  In every role I held, I remained the only female leader on my team.  In the instances where I was offered the promotion, my boss was also a female but I remained the only female leader on the team.  In my current role, I am one of two females.  The top-level leaders at my organization are made up of, you guessed it, all men and one woman.  

I can also see how I alter my behaviors to better suit a societies idea of the female role.   The challenge for a woman in leadership is finding the balance.  If I am too direct, I am labeled a you-know-what.  If I am too passive, I am a pushover.  Northouse further illustrates this trap stating that “women face a double standard in the leadership role “they must come across as extremely competent but also as appropriately “feminine” (Northouse, 2016, p. 408).  I am constantly assessing my approach to control the perception of my leadership.  I do notice that I tend to lean towards a more transformational approach to my personal leadership style, which Northouse identifies as “beneficial for women” because it is not particularly masculine and more representative of traditional feminine behaviors (Northouse, 2016).  Unfortunately, society has maintained that leadership is a masculine quality, more suited to men than women.  The cultural norm remains that “the characteristics associated with leadership roles have been attached more to men than to women. As a consequence, it is assumed that leadership is more congruent with the masculine gender role than the feminine gender role” (Garcia-Retamero & López-Zafra, 2006).  This use of a more transformational approach to leadership gives me the opportunity to lead, but still satisfy some of the gender norms I am restricted to.    

Another thing I can relate to as to holding back my progress as a female leader is the unavailability of strong female mentors.  This lack of mentorship can be explained by differences of human capital.  This purports that women simply do not have the experience, education or training that male counterparts have.  If we think about it, how can I develop as a leader if I am not given the same opportunities as a man, BECAUSE I do not have the experience.  In other words, I cannot get experience, if you will not let me.  This takes me back to the idea of mentors; there are not enough female mentors to go around, and men do not want to mentor me.  If we look across the leadership teams within organizations, women are few and far between— especially women holding rank and power” (Johnson & Smith, 2016 p.22). The fact is, that women “face far more hurdles than men when it comes to securing mentors” (Johnson & Smith, 2016 p.13) and a large piece of this is due to the fact that so few are available.  It is a cycle that keeps repeating itself.  This is where men need to step in and take on female mentees if society is going to progress and break the rhythm.   

The challenges faced by women in the sphere of leadership are glaring…to women.  As a woman, I challenge men in positions of leadership to take the opportunity to mentor and develop a female and her leadership skills.  Not only will she benefit, but the male leader and organization as a whole stand to gain a lot from developing women and their leadership capabilities.  According to Athena Rising, “When men mentor women, those women make more money, enjoy more promotions, receive greater acceptance from other men in the workplace, and are more satisfied with their careers— and, most important, mentored women are far more likely to remain loyal to the organization in which they are mentored” (Johnson & Smith, 2016 p.43).  The benefits are substantial for everyone involved.  Leadership isn’t just for men, and women need men to help move them upwards.   

 

 

 

 

References 

 

 

Garcia-Retamero, R., & López-Zafra, E. (2006). Prejudice against Women in Male-congenial Environments: Perceptions of Gender Role Congruity in Leadership. Sex Roles,55(1-2), 51-61. doi:10.1007/s11199-006-9068-1 

Johnson, W. B., & Smith, D. (2016). Athena rising: How and why men should mentor women. Brookline, MA: Bibliomotion. 

Northouse, P. G. (2016). Leadership: Theory and practice. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.

Servant leadership is an approach to leadership in which the leader “has a need/desire to serve others so that they can develop themselves and therefore perform to meet organizational needs” (PSU WC L11 p.2).  With servant leadership, the leader serves their followers in a way the promotes their own success and development.  The idea of servant leadership presents that leaders want to “serve first” (Northouse, 2016, p. 226).  Servant leaders place the needs of their followers before their own interests, and focus wholly on the development of their followers.  Northouse identifies ten fundamental characteristics of servant leadership that include: 

Listening 

Empathy 

Healing 

Awareness 

Persuasion 

Conceptualization 

Foresight 

Stewardship 

Commitment to the growth of people 

Building Community  (Northouse, 2016 p. 228) 

Judging from the characteristics described above, it is easy to see the empasis servant leadership puts on the leader’s overall concern for their followers.  There is an overarching theme of follower well-being and the role the leader plays in their relationship with their followers.  Servant leaders do not “dominate, direct, or control; but rather, leaders should share control and influence” (Northouse, 2016 p. 240).  The question I draw from this servant approach lies in discipline and accountability; where does this fit in with servant leadership. 

For many people, servant leadership is weak.  In fact, servant leadership actually conflicts with “other principles of leadership such as directing, concern for production, goal-setting, and creating a vision” (Northouse, 2016 p. 241).  Within any results-based organization these are fundamental concepts that ensure success of individual contributor success.  Afterall, results drive success.  If servant leaders are not directing, and inspecting results then how can any business be successful with this approach? 

The fact is, servant leaders can still exercise discipline, they may just have a different approach.  Fostering a culture that values “follower performance and growth, organizational performance and societal impact” will in itself serve as serve to promote personal accountability.  This personal accountability will serve to correct any unacceptable behavior demonstrated by followers.  However, as any leader knows, there will be times that behaviors need to be addressed and corrected at any organization, no matter how much you implement servant leadership.  With servant leadership, we would aim to have the follower self-aware of their behavioral shortcomings or mistakes and use these mis-steps as opportunities to learn.  The objective of performance discipline would be to teach followers what is right and wrong, not just to punish.  Simply relying on corrective action as a means to correct behavior or lacking performance does not follow the model of servant leadership.  After you give every opportunity to learn and grow from mistakes, then the leader does have an obligation to exercise performance correction, but the discussion would be quite easy based on the prior opportunity given to learn and correct the behavior thru the lessons learned up to that point.  In fact, from Servant Leadership in Action, servant leaders will “redirect when behavior dictates, and provide training, development, coaching, and opportunities for growth” (Blanchard, Broadwell, & Maxwell, 2018, ch.8).  This approach aims to develop your followers to make the right choices.  So, this does not mean servant leaders don’t hold low performers accountable, they understand the learning process and give individuals the opportunity to learn and grow before taking disciplinary actions.  Servant leadership does not mean disregard for accountability, “But their default position when a teammate fails is curiosity rather than condemnation” (Blanchard, Broadwell, & Maxwell, 2018 ch.7).  This is how discipline looks in servant leadership.   

 

 

 

 

 

References 

Canvas learning management system. (n.d.). Retrieved from https://psu.instructure.com/courses/1985970/modules 

Northouse, P. G. (2016). Leadership: Theory and practice. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications. 

Blanchard, K. H., Broadwell, R., & Maxwell, J. C. (2018). Servant leadership in action: How you can achieve great relationships and results. Oakland (CA): Berrett-Koehler. 

As I take a break from the week’s course load, I tuned into my show of the moment, The Handmaid’s Tale.  I realize this is the perfect example of power and influence in leadership.   

For those that are not familiar; The Handmaid’s Tale takes place in a dystopian America where an extremist group has overthrown the American Government and taken fertile women as hostages to repopulate the earth.  This series exemplifies the gross misuse of power and its influence on behavior.   

The Commanders of this new society rely solely on their absolute power to maintain control over their followers.  Their tactics are inhumane and excessive.  From the lesson on power and influence we learned that there are many different sources of power, and this show does well to illustrate these different sources of power.  The Commanders are all easily identified by their militant uniforms.  In addition, the indentured servants are identified as lower classes with their simple, mousy and timid attire.  The Handmaids are dressed in bright red, to easily identify them as subordinates.   

Of the five ways to influence identified in Lesson 7, Commanders rely on their legitimate power simply due to their rank in the organization.  They have authority because it was given to them from a hierarchical sense.  There are times when you may catch a glimpse of reward power in use, like in rewarding a Handmaid’s behavior with allowing them to eat from a buffet made strictly for the leaders.   However, like lesson 7 illustrates, these rewards are often not seen as rewards by the recipient.   

There is an overwhelming amount of coercive power at play in this series.  Lesson 7 defines coercive power as “a function of the leader and situation. It is the opposite of reward power. It is the ability to control others through the fear of punishment or the loss of valued outcomes.” (PSU WC L7 p. 5) The women trapped in this world perform and behave because they fear the repercussions for not complying.  Even the wives of the commanders live in fear of their husband’s authority.   

Some of the influence tactics employed by the commanders include coalition tactics, pressure tactics, and legitimizing tactics.  The leaders of this new world are forced to use these tactics to minimize resistance and maximize compliance.  The fact that these indentured women are further broken into caste systems (the wives, Martha’s (or housekeepers) and handmaids (women forced to have children) makes it easier for leaders to employ coalition tactics.  These women are made not to trust each other, so there is a herd mentality to comply.  These women enforce the leadership rules and indirectly influence others to comply.  In addition, it could be said that the pressure tactics are the main source of influence.  Commanders rely on “threats or persistent reminders used to influence targets” (PSU WC L7 p.5) as a way to maintain order and compliance.  While these threats are quite drastic, including being sent away to labor camps and death, they are great examples of pressure tactics nonetheless.  

 

References

Canvas learning management system. (n.d.). Retrieved from https://psu.instructure.com/courses/1985970/modules/items/26589518 

Contingency theory in leadership posits that leaders are consistent in their behavior tendencies with differing situations.  It suggests that leaders cannot change their behavior/style and instead recommends finding the right leader for the right situation” (PSU WC L. 6 p. 3).  This general idea is that some leaders are more inclined to be successful in certain situations, and that just because they were successful in one situation, does not guarantee success in an entirely different situation. Based on the research of F.E. Fielder, it was concluded that certain leadership styles work best in certain types of situations (Northouse, 2007).   

I have experienced this theory in action as someone who frequently participates in the hiring process at my current organization.  Recently, there has been a job opening for a leadership position in my sales district.  This individual would be a peer of mine.  My direct manager asked that I take part in the hiring process for this replacement. 

To set the stage, the former manager of this sales team was recently terminated.  This was a termination that no one saw coming, and the sales team under this individual felt blindsided.  This team was very tight knit, in fact the manager often had them over to his house for barbeques, and took them on “team outings” often.  This team was in no way high performing but they were known for being very close with each other.  When the manager was terminated, the morale within this group was destroyed.  They began to not show up to work, calling off, applying for family leave, results dropped.  They were in a bad place.  

Considering all of the applicants that we were beginning to interview, we had a wide range of individuals to work with.  All of them came with great past results on their current sales team.  It was when my DM and I began to eliminate individuals that she made a great observation to me.  She would need to be very careful who she put into this role based on the delicate state they were in.  If she put someone in there that has a tendency to be more aggressive and tough, it could collapse this team.  In effect, what she was doing was applying the contingency theory to her hiring decision.  She understood that their leadership style would determine success in the role based around the current situation of the sales team.  My DM recognized that “effective leadership is contingent on (depends on) matching a leader’s style to the right setting” (PSU WS L.6 p. 3).   

Taking into consideration how Fielder evaluated the general styles applied by leaders, this position would be best suited for a leader that is high on the LPC scale.  Leaders that rate high here are motivated by relationships, and focus first on building and maintaining relationships with their followers (PSU WC, L6. P. 5).  This is one advantage of the application of this theory; it has predictive power (Northouse, 2007 p. 117).  Contingency theory can help us predict the success of a leader in certain situations, and in this case, placing a leader with a high priority of tasks versus relationships could be detrimental to both the leader and team success.  In fact, placing a leader in a situation not suited to their style can cause stress and anxiety and result in immature way of that leader coping and likely leads to poor decisions (PSU WC L.6 p.5).   

There is truly something to be said about placing the right leader in the right situation.  While it may not be realistic to remove a leader from a situation their style does not match with, if you play any part in the hiring process it would be wise to consider the situation in which you are placing this leader and examining if their leadership style is best suited to that unique situation.  It is much easier to make smarter hiring decisions that it is to fix a bad hiring decision.  In fact, “companies should try to place leaders in optimal situations, in situations that are ideal for their leadership style” (Northouse, 2007 p.117). 

 

References 

Northouse, Peter Guy. Contingency Theory. Leadership: Theory and Practice. Thousand Oaks. SAGE.  2007 1452203407. Pp. 113-126 

 

Pennsylvania State University World Campus. (2019). Lesson 6: Contingency & path-goal theories. PSYCH485: Leadership in Work Settings. Retrieved May 27, 2019, from https://courses.worldcampus.psu.edu/canvas/su19/2195min-5376/content/06_lesson/printlesson.html (Links to an external site.)Links to an external site. 

When I think back throughout my career and apply the concepts of what is true leadership looks like, I can easily recognize the difference between managers and leaders.  In the literal sense, a manager is tasked with “planning, organizing, staffing and controlling” (Northouse, 2015 p. 13).  The concept of managing is seemingly very task oriented and maintains a high sense of control over subordinates with little autonomy.  Managers are there to simply “provide order and consistency to organizations” (Northouse, 2015 p. 13).  With management there is a somewhat militant vibe, with managers having a high level of control over their support staff.  Employees typically do not have any say in how and when tasks are completed, and have many precise, stiff rules to follow.   

While management is a necessary aspect to operating any organization effectively, management without leadership can be “stifling and bureaucratic” (Northouse, 2015 p. 13).  I’m certain every person reading this can name off several examples of a manager they have worked for that exhibited zero leadership skills.  Working for an individual like this can have a detrimental effect on employee morale and organizational results.   

I once worked for someone that was the quintessential example of a manager with little leadership ability.  This individual was so focused on controlling every bit of our work that we were left with no motivation and poor results.  We were told exactly what to do, and when to do it.  We were never asked for insight or ideas on how to reach our goals.  We were micromanaged to the point where we had to send her text messages every few hours outlining our sales results for the prior hours.  When we missed sales goals, it was always our fault and had to draft lengthy “action plans” on how we were going to correct our failure.  We were often threatened with corrective action for failure to meet goals.  As you can see, this does not create the greatest environment for success.  Turnover was high.   Employees were burnt out and calling off work often; some even exercising long term FMLA claims for stress.  There was no employee development, and no shared vision and no concern for people.  While organizations employ managers to ensure there is organization, stability and profitable results, doing so without fostering leadership does not make for more positive outcomes.   

The fact is, “both management and leadership are essential if an organization is to prosper” (Northouse, 2015 p 13).  It is critical that managers also develop leadership skills in order to be the most effective.  Organizations need to ensure they “nourish both competent management and skilled leadership” (Northouse, 2015 p 13) to promote the best results.   

So, what transforms traditional management into leadership?  Leaders help to create a vision with their followers.  As a leader in a sales environment, a leader inspires their sales team to want to meet goals.  A leader doesn’t just dictate the plan to meet goals, they collaborate and “develop a culture that encourages, supports and rewards individual and team achievements” (Zimmerman, E.L, 2001).  A leader doesn’t rely on power to accomplish goals, “He/she engages willingly in coaching, feedback, recognition, brainstorming and mentoring in order to maximize the enterprise’s results” (Zimmerman, E.L, 2001). A leader understands the human and emotional side to motivating and developing their staff.    

While leadership certainly shares functions of management, management without leadership fails to “motivate intrinsically” and fails to allow for “creative thinking, strategic planning, tolerance to ambiguity, being able to read people” (Northouse, 2015 p 15).  It is possible, and preferred, that those in leadership positions “combine the best elements of both disciplines most needed for optimum results” (Zimmerman, E.L, 2001).   

 

References 

Northouse, P. G. (2015). Leadership: Theory and Practice. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications. 

Penn State Canvas Login. (n.d.). Retrieved from https://psu.instructure.com/courses/1985970/modules/items/26589411 

Zimmerman, E. L. (2001). What’s under the hood? the mechanics of leadership versus management. SuperVision, 62(8), 10-12. Retrieved from http://ezaccess.libraries.psu.edu/login?url=https://search-proquest-com.ezaccess.libraries.psu.edu/docview/195597976?accountid=13158