What makes one leader effective and another one fail? Anyone who wants to be a leader has asked themselves this question at one point. The huge interest in this question has caused us to study leaders such as Steve Jobs, Oprah Winfrey, Mao Zedong, Mahatma Gandhi, and Martin Luther King Jr. Similarly, numerous research articles have tried to research leadership styles that promote the success of leaders. According to Northouse (2021), leadership style refers to how a person behaves to be able to influence others to work together towards certain goals. The primary leadership behaviors that have been determined to be effective include directive, charismatic, supportive, and participative behaviors (Hwang et al., 2015). However, the studies are contradictory about which leadership behaviors are most effective. For example, the study by Fellows et al. (2003) reported that directive behaviors undermined leadership outcomes, while a Hwang et al. (2015) reported that directive behaviors enhanced leadership outcomes. Based on my experience and contradictory findings of studies on leadership behaviors, I will argue that there is no one size fits all when it comes to leadership, and leaders need to use the situational leadership theory (SLT) to adapt their leadership style based on the situation to enhance leadership outcomes.

Leadership does not exist in a vacuum, it is a process in which the leader, followers, outcomes, and context influence each other (Free Management Books, n.d.). The leader can give directives, but if the followers do not follow the directives then the set goals will not be achieved. On the other hand, if the directives are not appropriate, then the set goals will not be attained despite the followers implementing them. Therefore, leaders are just as important as followers when it comes to leadership (Northouse, 2021). However, each person, leader or follower, has unique traits, skills, competencies, and personalities, which can undermine the effectiveness of the leadership process if these differences are not accommodated (Fellows et al., 2003). While one employee may prefer autonomous work, another one may prefer structured work. Additionally, differences in context and outcomes influence the leadership process. Outcomes refer to the common goals that followers and leader want to achieve, while context refers to the task requirements and working conditions (Free Management Books, n.d.). An example of context being important in the leadership process is the current Ukraine crisis. The president, who is usually just expected to just give directives to the military during war, decided to join the military in the field because he felt that the situation necessitated it. This act of joining the war motivated many ordinary people to join the war, and motivated the troops. As such, these differences necessitate leaders to adapt their leadership style, and SLT provides a great framework that leaders can use to ensure that their leadership style fits the situation.

Leadership behaviors can be categorized as supportive behaviors and directive behaviors (Northouse, 2021). Directive behaviors refers to setting goals, defining roles, developing an action plan, evaluating outcomes, and giving directions. They usually involve the leader telling the followers what to do for them to achieve set goals. Supportive behaviors refer interactions between leaders and followers on a personal level, creating meaningful work relationships. Ukraine’s president joining the military in the field is an example of supportive leadership behaviors. According to SLT, leadership styles can be divided into delegating, supporting, coaching, and directing based on the level of supportive and directive behaviors exhibited by a leader as shown in the figure below (Northouse, 2021). Delegating involves the leader giving followers autonomy on how they want to complete a given task, giving little social support and goal input. Similarly, in a supporting approach, the followers have autonomy over their work, but the leader supports them by giving advice, feedback, and recognition. Coaching involves the leader offering both social support and goal input. Directing involves the leader giving comprehensive instructions on goal accomplishment, but without few supportive behaviors.

As you can see these leadership styles are different, thus the appropriateness of one style over the other depends on the followers’ development level. As such, leaders need to evaluate the development level of their followers to determine which style to use for them to be successful (Northouse, 2021). According to the SLT, the directing approach is suitable for followers who have little knowledge and expertise but are excited about to complete the task. The coaching approach suitable for followers who have some knowledge and expertise but are becoming demotivated. The supporting approach is appropriate for followers who are highly skilled but they are not very confident in their ability to complete the task. The delegating approach is for workers who are highly competent and committed to their job. An example of an industry where the delegating approach is widely used is the technology industry because workers in this industry tend to be highly skilled and have a high level of commitment.

I remember when I started my first internship, I was very excited when given assignment even though I did not know how to complete them. My manager explained the results that he expected and how he wanted to me to go about doing this work. I enjoyed these explicit instructions for a while because I felt that they enhanced my learning and made work easier. His leadership style could be described as directing because he told me how and what exactly to do (Northouse, 2021). However, after two months, I started despising being told exactly what and how to do something because I felt that I was not learning anything new. My motivation for work decreased as it was no longer challenging. When I talked to my manager about my demotivation with work, he did not seem interested in finding a solution to the problem. My manager failed to realize that I was developing as a follower, and he needed to change his leadership style because the directing approach was no longer working for me. I wanted to be able to use my newly acquired skills and knowledge to do tougher assignments. He should have changed from a directing approach to a coaching or supportive approach. As such, it is important for leaders to realize that their followers are growing, and then adapt their leadership style to the current developmental level of the follower for their leadership to be effective.

In addition to followers’ developmental level, leaders should also consider the context of leadership. One of the important aspects of context is the culture of the country in which the organization is operating in as different cultures have different preferences on leadership styles (Northouse, 2021). As more companies are becoming multinational, it is important for leaders to adapt their leadership behaviors based on the local culture. Leadership behaviors that worked for U.S. employees might fail while applied to Chinese employees even when their developmental level is the same. For example, a study by Hong et al. (2016) that compared the impact of leadership styles on affective organizational commitment among US employees versus Korean employees reported that directive leadership fosters organizational commitment among Korean employees but it had the opposite effect among their US counterparts. This difference can be attributed to the culture in the US being individualistic, as such employees value their autonomy. They also reported that supportive leadership had a positive impact in both countries. These findings were similar to those of the study by Dorfman et al. (1997) that established that the impact of directive leadership depends on the local culture present while that of supportive leadership was universal. As such, leaders need to consider the cultural values of their employees in deciding which leadership style to use.

Having worked both in China and America, I have experienced first hand how leadership styles in these two countries are different because of the difference in cultural values. When I worked in China, I saw how employees loved leaders who were high on both directing behaviors and supporting behaviors. Being a collectivistic culture, we value personal relationships the most, thus business is usually mixed with personal life. Therefore, Chinese leaders need to exhibit high supporting behaviors not only related to work matters but also personal matters to gain informal authority. Additionally, Confucianism values are the foundation of our culture, therefore obedience to leaders is highly valued. Followers expect their leaders to offer directives that are effective in achieving the organizational and personal outcomes, and they follow these directives to the letter. As such, leaders who are high on directing behaviors as well as supporting behaviors are successful in China. On the contrary, my colleagues and friends in the US love their autonomy, and do not appreciate being told how and what to do by their bosses. As such, I have had several friends and colleagues quit their jobs because they felt that their bosses are high on directing behaviors. I never heard of such a complaint when I was working in China because we do not mind following instructions. Therefore, adapting the leadership style to fit local cultural values is important in enhancing leadership outcomes.

In conclusion, there is no one leadership style appropriate to all situations because the leadership process is influenced by followers, context, and outcomes. Leaders need to be able to adapt their leadership style based on the specific situation. One tool that leaders can use to adapt their leadership is SLT. SLT describes which leadership behaviors are appropriate for a given goal based on followers’ developmental level. As such, leaders need to determine the developmental level of each of their follower so as to know which leadership style to apply. Leaders also have to realize that followers are constantly developing, therefore they need to regularly determine each follower’s developmental level so that they can adapt their leadership style as needed. Leaders can use employee feedback surveys and interviews to determine the developmental level of employees. Additionally, leaders need to consider the local cultural value when determining the leadership style to use because different cultures based on their values prefer some leadership behaviors over others. By adapting one’s leadership style to a given situation, then one can be an effective leader who meets the goals set.

References

Dorfman, P. W., Howell, J. P., Hibino, S., Lee, J. K., Tate, U., & Bautista, A. (1997). Leadership in western and Asian countries: Commonalities and differences in effective leadership processes across cultures. The Leadership Quarterly, 8(3), 233-274. https://doi.org/10.1016/s1048-9843(97)90003-5

Fellows, R., Liu, A., & Fong, C. M. (2003). Leadership style and power relations in quantity surveying in Hong Kong. Construction Management and Economics, 21(8), 809-818. https://doi.org/10.1080/0144619032000174521

Free Management Books. (n.d.). Dunham and pierce’s leadership process model. Free Management eBooks – Online Library. https://www.free-management-ebooks.com/faqld/leadtheory-03.htm

Hong, G., Cho, Y., Froese, F. J., & Shin, M. (2016). The effect of leadership styles, rank, and seniority on affective organizational commitment: A comparative study of U.S. and Korean employees. Cross Cultural & Strategic Management, 23(2). https://doi.org/10.1108/ccsm-03-2014-0034

Hwang, S. J., Quast, L. N., Center, B. A., Chung, C. N., Hahn, H., & Wohkittel, J. (2015). The impact of leadership behaviours on leaders’ perceived job performance across cultures: Comparing the role of charismatic, directive, participative, and supportive leadership behaviours in the U.S. and four Confucian Asian countries. Human Resource Development International, 18(3), 259-277. https://doi.org/10.1080/13678868.2015.1036226

Northouse, P. G. (2021). Leadership: Theory and practice (9th ed.). SAGE Publications.

 

 

 

 

 

If you have ever been to Great Wolf Lodge, you will notice the strict walk and stance that lifeguards are required to comply with. It’s similar to how British soldiers walk. With one hand holding a rescue buoy, the other is in a tight fist moving up and down as they march back and forth. This is a very strict technique. Every so often fake children are thrown into the water to keep the lifeguard’s vigilante and always on the lookout for danger. From the outside looking in everything looks fine. If the lifeguard does their job well, they got a congratulatory pat on the back and thumbs up from coworkers.

This attitude tells me that supervisors were achievement-oriented leaders. Achievement-oriented leaders place hurdles in front of followers with the expectation and confidence that they can get through it and will ultimately improve their performance (Northouse, 2021, p. 136). By always keeping lifeguards on their toes, timing how long it takes them to respond to emergencies and providing training and certifications such as CPR training you would think they were trying all that they could to ensure subordinates were performing at their highest level.

Looking at reviews on Indeed is a different story. Many reviews state that favoritism played a huge role in who received privileges, scheduling appears terrible, and many were overworked with a lack of bathroom breaks. One former employee stated that management treated lifeguards like numbers, was constantly watched and written up for small things (Indeed, 2021). This tells me that leaders showed a lack of consideration in their leadership behavior. Consideration according to the style approach, means building trust, comradery, and fellowship amongst a team or group of people (PSU WC, 2016, L. 5, p.5). If you constantly have to watch your back because you know everyone is only out for themselves then trust will never be built.

We see self-defeating behaviors within Great Wolf Lodge. Within the style approach we see the self-defeating behavior of, Inability to build relationships. This typically occurs when a leader is unable to meet the needs of followers (PSU WC, 2016, L. 5, p. 9). Many of these employees were high school students who were looking for part time work while they were in school. Management was unable to meet their needs of a basic schedule that would work around their school hours. Another need that was not met was bathroom breaks. One review stated that the supervisor struggled to schedule time for breaks do to short staffing, another stated that they were required to stand for 7 hours straight.

In conclusion, when analyzing leadership from the outside looking in at Great Wolf Lodge, it looks great. I saw achievement-oriented leadership. Lots of motivation, opportunities, and positive challenges to me were great signs of leadership. After reading the reviews I realize I was wrong. Within the style approach we see that lack of consideration, and self-defeating behaviors were prominent.

References:

• Northouse, P. G. (2021). Leadership: Theory and Practice(9th Edition). SAGE Publications, Inc. (US). https://bookshelf.vitalsource.com/books/9781071834473
• Pennsylvania State University World Campus (2016). PSYCH 485 Lesson 5: Style and Situational Approaches. Retrieved from https://psu.instructure.com/courses/2181168/modules
• Indeed. (2021, November 06). Great Wolf Lodge. Retrieved from Great Wolf Lodge Employee Reviews for Lifeguard: https://www.indeed.com/cmp/Great-Wolf-Lodge/reviews?fjobtitle=Lifeguard

 

Religion can often be a danced-around subject, especially in the sciences. However, it provides lots of opportunities to observe leadership and followership in a non-work environment. The interaction between followers and leaders in a church environment is very dynamic. This post will discuss the many applications of leadership theories with the interplay of religious leaders and their followers. Out of familiarity with American/Western culture, I will use Christianity as the example throughout this post, but many concepts can be applied to other religions which are more prominent in other areas of the world. 

Religious leaders, such as preachers and pastors, possess certain powers within a church setting: referent, expert, and legitimate power. Referent power is established from likeability, expert powers are based on the credibility of knowledge relevant to the purpose or goal , and legitimate power is associated with the status of the position held within the organization (Northouse, P. G. (2021) page 11). In the church institution, referent power would be seen in the way the pastors and other religious leaders get along with the members. Although some denominations are more hierarchical, many congregations have the direct ability to select their own pastor or at least can exert significant influence over getting a pastor moved to a different church.  Thus, if they are not successful at fostering relationships through referent power, they are likely to fail.  Expert power is established by one’s knowledge on the history of the religion and ancient texts regarding the faith.  Although some of the newer independent denominations don’t require formal training, most require years of study that make the pastor an authority that people in the congregation will respect for their knowledge.  Legitimate power is created through appointment by denomination leadership.  The appointment comes with certain rights and responsibilities that are understood and reinforced by the organization through policies and procedure manuals.  

Some pastors can rely more on one of these powers than others.  For example, in the Catholic church, the priest is considered a voice of God and their appointment by the church, legitimate power, overrides all the other powers.  In some of the newer independent denominations, the charisma and likeability, referent power, is most important.  The Congregational church values individual intellectual study of the Bible and the congregation selects their own pastor.  In that case, expert power is appreciated more than the others.  In any one of these cases, the most successful leaders will combine the different powers to become an even more effective leader and can create a strong followership that helps achieve the goals of the organization. 

Moreover, there are specific skills and behaviors that religious leaders would benefit from having more than others. Based on the Mumford Skills Model, competencies such as social judgment and social skills are imperative for religious leaders. These skills involve the ability to take perspective and empathizing with others; behavioral flexibility that allows one to change the way they interact with others based on other people’s perspectives; and the ability to communicate goals, visions, and messages to the others. (Northouse, P. G. (2021) page 65). Social skills are very important because religious leaders have to respond to a lot of different situations that involve interactions with others. The ability to effectively communicate the goals of the church and religion while empathizing with the needs of the congregation is one of the most important duties of a preacher’s position. 

Additionally, because the behavioral flexibility is critical, another theory that supports the role of religious leaders is the situational approach. The situational approach suggests that different situations require different styles of leadership. (PSU WC, 2022, L. 5 p.12). The leadership styles include directing, coaching, supporting, and delegating. Directing focuses on achieving goals through specific instructions without a lot of concern for supportive behaviors, coaching focuses both on the goals of the organization and the followers needs, supporting leaders tend to focus more on the followers and  include them in the decision making process within the organization, and delegating leaders tend to put the majority of the goals and tasks in the hands of the followers (PSU WC, 2022, L. 5 p.13). 

Religious leaders may need to be more directive when coordinating specific events with volunteers.  For example, if the church holds a seminar on family and youth interaction in the church, the pastor is likely to give specific directions about participation, setup, breakdown, etc.  

A pastor may utilize a coaching approach when helping a new employee in a fairly high position.  A good example might be when a church hires a youth director when the pastor has previously been filling that role until the job got too big.  The pastor, when they hire the individual, already has a good idea of what they want the person to do.  If they are filling a pre-existing role, there may even be guidelines about how they should do the job. The pastor has definite objectives in mind and gives instructions to the new person that they believe will help them achieve the goals.

When working with groups who might become future leaders in the church, the pastor may employ a supporting style because they need to be attentive to the engagement and informational needs of their audience while trying to convey the key points of the message.  A good example of this would be when the pastor is preparing a youth group for a mission trip.  They want to encourage the youth to be excited about the trip while learning information that they need to successfully.  Allowing them to have input gives them emotional buy-in and more excitement about the trip.  

In many churches the pastor technically reports to a board of senior members of the church.  In this position the pastor employs a delegating leadership style.  An example of this would be for meetings where members of a church are taking votes on church direction, reviewing budgets and receiving input on current state of affairs within the church.  In these cases playing a delegating role empowers the lay leaders.  The diversity of ideas can result in decisions that can both attract new members and increase retention.

 Another important factor to consider is the followership involved within a religious institution. Followership is acceptance of an individual to become a leader (Northouse, P. G. (2021) page 353). In this perspective, leadership is seen as a co-created process in which the leadership behaviors act in conjunction with the follower behaviors which then produces the leadership in-action and the outcomes that come after (Northouse, P. G. (2021) page 364). Because of the heavy interaction among different members of a congregation, a pastor must be able to receive and consider their feedback. For, they may influence him or her just as much as he or she influences individual  members of the church when it comes to planning lessons or sermons and events.  Receiving input from the followers or congregation allows religious leaders to address their followers’ needs and desires and incorporate their responses into his or her behaviors. This establishes a communication channel that allows followers to be an active participant in the decisions made by the church and feel a sense of belonging. 

There are many ways religious leaders utilize leadership theory and the many hats they wear can directly impact how people see the religion and how they see the institutions. Being flexible in behavior and adaptive in how one handles situations is a great way to be an effective leader, and is especially important for leaders whose primary job is to work and interact with people. Religious leaders are very similar to other leaders, however, their goals can be much different from other organizations, thus the leadership practices should be examined. It is important to see how psychological factors are related to aspects of people’s lives  so we can observe the real-time application of them. 

 

References 

Pennsylvania State University World Campus (2022). PSYCH 485 Retrieved from 

https://psu.instructure.com/courses/2181168/modules/items/35188530 

Northouse, P. G. (2021). Leadership: Theory & Practice (9 ed.). Thousand Oaks, California: Sage Publications, Inc.

 

We hear the word “leadership” we hear it all the time in the workplace, at school, even just in everyday life. But what is leadership? If you google leadership, the definition that comes up is “the action of leading a group of people or an organization.” (Google 2019) However, when you ask someone what their definition of leadership is, they most likely will give you a different definition. Every person has their own idea of leadership, so let us dive into what dose leadership means.  

You might wonder, why do people have definitions of leadership that are so vastly different? Is it their experiences, the situation, or just the people that they have interacted with? I believe the answer is all of the above. People’s perception of leadership is based on prior experience or interactions that involved a leader. Whether the experience with the leader is good or bad, a perception of leadership is still created.  

I interviewed a few of my friends about what leadership meant to them. Each of their responses were quite different from one another. Marisa Chetsko gave a more straight forward answer of what leadership meant to her by starting leadership is “Constructing, delegating tasks, and following through” (Marisa Chetsko). When Cody was asked what leadership meant to him, he responded with, “One that has been trusted from followers” (Cody Hutter). I thought his response was interesting because few people involve the follower in their response of what is leadership. The last response included the leader as well as the followers. The last idea of leadership I got was, “Someone who can take charge, give good details and not hurt others while doing it” (Aaron Wilson). His definition embodies part of the leader as well as the followers. Even though they all had different responses, each of their responses related to some core idea from google definition.  

However, with leadership there is still the idea that even though someone is in a leadership position, it does not make them a good or proper leader. This is a valid point that many bring up. While many people are put in leadership positions, not all are deserving or capable of handling such an intense task. To be a good leader most can agree that one needs to influence others in a positive and motivating way.  

Everyone has their own idea and definition of leadership, but to me leadership is an honor that many have the opportunity to have. Every situation needs some kind of leader, whether it is solving a problem, giving a group motivation, or just supporting others. To me leadership is the ability to achieve and complete a goal that a group shares as well as influence those people in the group in a positive way. So, what does leadership mean to you? 

References: 

Google definition 2019  

Interviews from other people Marisa Chetsko, Cody Hutter, and Aaron Wilson 

 Are you ever been assigned a position of power as an employee or employer, or are you an organizer, or a participant in school or group projects? If not, you probably know someone who is or wants to be. Everybody within stands a chance of leading a group of people or following a leader at one point in life. Consequently, leadership, and followership form a basis for creating and propagating relationships. However, the quality of these relationships varies depending on the perceptions and behavior of the followers and leaders. They can be reflected in people’s commitment to work or projects and their satisfaction with work or projects. Hence, this essay seeks to discuss the relationship between followers and leaders using a real-life experience.

Undisputedly, as managers, employees, or group participants, we have experienced, if not heard, people rising to the positions of power but failing to achieve. Mainly, because one cannot simply lead an organization, or a group effectively. Currently, this situation is evident in several organizations. In my previous organization, we experienced failures in leadership as the person we entrusted with that job failed to demonstrate effective leadership. This event pushed one member of our group to step up as a leader. Harreld (2015) submitted that failure of ineffective leadership is associated with position, knowledge, personality, and even communication irrelevance that contributes to the emergence of another leader.

Interestingly, at this point, we realize the power of followers. Although the group member who stood to take up the leadership position was influential, the followers played a critical role in empowering his emergence. Harreld (2015) mentioned that emergent leaders rely on followers’ acceptability and valuation. Consequently, the emergent leaders could derive power from us. This experience shows that both leaders and followers greatly influence the leadership process because they both need each other. Leaders or followers cannot utilize leadership or followership without each other.

Realistically, most of us are and will continue to be followers more often than leaders. However, the perspective of being an effective follower has not been given as significant consideration as that of being an effective leader. The ineffectiveness of our leader was underpinned by struggles to succeed even when the industry was thriving. Harreld (2015) submitted that leaders in such situations fail to realize and uphold that followers often need some form of guidance, if not motivation, to be committed and satisfied with their work. In our case, the leaders failed to acknowledge that followers played an equal role in determining and pushing any group goal or agenda forward by supporting and empowering the leaders. The emergent leader gave up some amount of individual autonomy, enabling us to gain an extra level of security and better living standards. For this reason, and for believing that we had a hand in group achievements, the emergent leader received our empowerment and support.

In conclusion, There is a strong connection between followership and leadership, and a more significant percentage of us are followers rather than leaders. Effective followership forms a basis and foundation for effective leadership because good and skilled followers help nurture good leaders by empowering and supporting them(PSU WC, 2022, L.3). Besides this, effective followership plays a crucial role in determining and pushing an organization or a group forward, making leaders and followers both feel committed and satisfied which creates a cycle of growth and development for both followers and leaders(PSU WC, 2022, L.3).

References

Harreld, N. (2015). Followership-Leadership Theory: With Examples from YouTube and Modern Media. https://www.academia.edu/download/57883944/Dissertation.pdf

Pennsylvania State University World Campus. (2022). Psych 485 Lesson 3: Followership. Retrieved from https://psu.instructure.com/courses/2181168/modules/items/35188514