Leadership

PSYCH 485 blog

Objectivity and Empowerment to Combat Toxicity

by

Toxic leadership constructs an environment where followers feel compelled to agree with their leader for fear of reprimand if they don’t (Mehta & Maheshwari, 2014). Additionally, rather than organizational needs being what the unit works towards, it’s the leaders needs and motives that the followers are attempting to meet (Mehta & Maheshwari, 2014). However, this is notably the more extreme behaviors of a toxic leader since the definition is hard to pinpoint. The lens of toxic leaders shifts depending on the level of toxicity, how that leader is perceived and the type of situations that elicit toxic behaviors (Mehta & Maheshwari, 2014). Furthermore, it could be argued that followers who exhibit passive traits (i.e., are “sheep”), where they conform to the leader’s vision and needs, could be just as responsible for enabling a toxic leader (Kelley, 1992, as cited in Northouse, 2021; Northouse, 2021). This is supported through the reversing the lens framework that addresses how followership behavior affects the leader’s behavior and shapes their perception of how followers will respond (i.e., followership outcomes) to their leadership style (Northouse, 2021). If a toxic leader perceives their followers as meek and docile, then they will use that to their advantage to ensure that their vision is realized. Since toxic leaders are usually synonymous with influential leaders, its easy to see why a more passive follower would be blinded by their manipulation to continue to follow their lead (Mehta & Maheshwari, 2014). Traits such as intelligence and self-confidence could be attributed to the toxic leader (Northouse, 2021). A toxic leader can be highly intelligent and effective at their jobs, which is a trait positively associated with competent leadership (Tavanti, 2011; Northouse, 2021). This makes toxic leaders, through the perspective of followers, that much harder to navigate because of the fluctuations between potential effective leadership traits paired with destructive traits.

This notion that followers further perpetuate toxic leaders, and their behaviors is supported through Lipman-Blumen’s (2005) exploration of destructive leaders from the followership perspective (Northouse, 2021). One psychological factor of note is how followers have a sense of powerlessness when it comes to challenging their leader’s harmful actions (Lipman-Blumen, 2005, as cited in Northouse, 2021). Racial prejudice and discrimination can be among those harmful actions. It’s supported that many victims would rather deal with and accommodate the discrimination than risk reprimand (Crosby et al., 2003). Since victims are unlikely to come forward, its important to have objective processes built into the organization to address this discrimination as well as active leaders and managers to identify and address the toxicity (Crosby et al., 2003; Tavanti, 2011). Through the social program of Affirmative Action, discrimination is addressed through objective means of aggregate data that allows for a more objective approach to discovering toxic leaders and practices (Crosby et al., 2003). Additionally, Tavanti (2011) states that organizations should adopt “toxin detectors” which would help with the identification of toxicity and helps empower subordinates to have a voice (p. 133). Another means of combating toxic leaders is, as a follower, fostering the inherent leadership qualities within and seeking democratic leaders and processes (Lipman-Blumen, 2005, as cited in Tavanti, 2011). Working from being a passive follower to an exemplary follower could alleviate the effects from a toxic leader since there is a re-alignment of aversion to criticism and instead offering it up and taking on a more active role vs. being a meeker follower that simply blindly follows (Northouse, 2021).

 

References:

Crosby, F. J., Iyer, A., Clayton, S., & Downing, R. A. (2003). Affirmative action: Psychological data and the policy debates. American Psychologist, 58, 93-115.

Mehta, S. & Maheshwari, G. C. (2016). Toxic Leadership: Tracing the Destructive Trail. International Journal of Management, 5(10), 18-24.

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

Tavanti, M. (2011). Managing toxic leaders: Dysfunctional patterns in organizational leadership and how to deal with them. Human Resource Management, 2011, 127-136.

Inclusive Leadership – The First Steps to Diversity

by

All in! (Nagy, 2018)

Although we are making progress in the diversity demographics for CEO opportunities, it is very slow at the pace of molasses moving down a maple tree in the dead of winter. In 2021 the fortune 500 CEO demographics by race were 1.2% Black Americans (13.4% of the US population), 4% Hispanic Americans (18.5% of the US population), 8% Asian Americans (5.9% of the US population), and for gender 8.2% women are now CEOs (51.1% of the US population) (United States Census Bureau, 2021; Kurt, 2022; Statista, 2021). The disparity in this demographic is not a simple reflection of the population percentages of the US, for if it were, then we would likely see the numbers closer to a standard deviation or two away from the US percentages. Other factors contribute to the issue across people, processes, cultures, and more.

The benefits of diverse leadership at the top of the business ladder impact the organization’s bottom line. A series of McKinsey studies on diversity have found that the more diverse your company is at the executive level, the increase your profit margins 25% above average (Prince et al., 2020). Still, we are slow to realize these compounded benefits when we value fully integrated diversity. Perhaps, the disordering of the word’s diversity, equity, and inclusion led to a horse before the cart implementation. To have a diverse organization, one must first drive inclusivity, making diversity the output. McKinsey outlined five indicators of inclusivity as diverse representation, leadership accountability, equality, openness, and belonging (Prince et al., 2020). With inclusion being a leading element for growing equity and diversity, inclusive leadership is a transparent approach (Northouse, 2021).

What is inclusive leadership?

Inclusion is the extent to which members feel they belong to an organization or group and feel their uniqueness of beliefs, attitudes, ideals, and background are appreciated (Northouse, 2021, p.350). Inclusive leadership is a holistic engagement across the organization that fosters positive interactions at every level and with everyone. Inclusivity thus becomes a shared responsibility, everyone imbuing it as a cultural imperative for the organization (Northouse, 2021, p. 350).

Three goals of Inclusive leadership are (Northouse, 2021):

The Power of Inclusion (Epic, 2020)

  1. Create a shared identity among members to ensure everyone feels belonging.
  2. Reduce status differences and ensure everyone is treated with equal respect.
  3. Facilitate everyone’s participation to ensure equal input in making decisions.

Ok, so how do I become an inclusive leader/teammate?

Inclusion is a set of learned and developed behaviors requiring self-reflection and conscious attention. We often see the world from our perspective, shaped by our sense of self and interactions with the world. Since inclusion includes feelings of belonging and value, one must seek to see from the viewpoint of others over their own. Your intentions to treat someone with inclusivity may not be inclusive at all. Making the regular effort to understand opens the aperture of your awareness to begin to see things from other people’s points of view.

To further learn to be more inclusive, one must change their mindset, shift their values, and adopt a new style of interaction with others (Northouse, 2021, p. 350). Perhaps the most challenging but crucial area to develop is unconscious bias recognition in yourself. We all have biases, yet we don’t train ourselves to recognize them, mitigate them, and limit their imposition on our thinking. Looking for the root of inclusive behavior starts with us reflecting on our unconscious and conscious biases and obtaining a teammate to help hold ourselves accountable (Northouse, 2021, p. 350).

A while back, I recall hearing the word “tolerance” concerning inclusion and diversity (at the time DEI), and I couldn’t help but feel off-put by the statement. Semantics matter because they drive sentiments and behaviors. To tolerate is to allow and accept without interference (Merriam-Webster, 2022). The word “understanding” is preferred because understanding requires the effort to engage in comprehension fostering harmony not through similarities but rather through appreciation of differences (Miriam-Webster, 2022). While the leader sets the tone for these behaviors, success for inclusive behaviors must become team-focused and own initiative.

Although inclusive leadership lacks the rigors of extensive scientifically validated research, the emergence and significance of current societal challenges require a more focused study. Another aspect of inclusion is public allyship for diverse personnel. In many cases, cultural and personality differences limit buy-in from all group members during meetings or collaborations; this can also lead to an increase in social dominance. SDO, or social dominance orientation, prefers one’s group over others in a hierarchical sense (PSU WC, 2022, L13).

Our natural primitive cognitions have many afflictions to be effective in today’s complex world. With focused attention and practice, an inclusive leader can create a shared identity among all members, reduce status differences through increased respect, and ensure everyone participates and provides input (Northouse, 2021, p. 350). Inclusive team diversity increases organizations’ creativity, performance, and profits (Prince et al., 2020). Inclusivity is a cornerstone of American values, and it is also our competitive advantage.

References

Kurt, D. (2022 Feb 28). Corporate Leadership by Race. Investopedia. https://www.investopedia.com/corporate-leadership-by-race-5114494.

Epic. (2020). Inclusive leadership makes powerful teams. Epic. https://epicassist.org/inclusive-leadership-makes-powerful-teams/.

Merriam-Webster. (2022). Dictionary. https://www.merriam-webster.com/

Nagy, I. (2018). Inclusive Work Practices – The Next Step. Investigo. https://www.investigo.co.uk/blog/2016/08/inclusive-work-practices-the-next-step?source=google.com

Northouse, P. G. (2021). Leadership (9th Edition). SAGE Publications, Inc. (US). https://bookshelf.vitalsource.com/books/9781071834473.

Pennsylvania State University World Campus (PSU WC). (2022). L13 Leadership and Diversity. PSYCH 485 Leadership and Work. https://psu.instructure.com/courses/2177519/modules/items/33991792.

Prince, S., Dolan, K., Hunt, V., and Dixon-Fyle, S. (2020 May). Diversity Wins: How inclusion matters. McKinsey & Company. https://www.mckinsey.com/featured-insights/diversity-and-inclusion/diversity-wins-how-inclusion-matters.

Statista. (2021 Sep 10). Total population of the United States by gender 2010-2025. Statista Research Department. https://www.statista.com/statistics/737923/us-population-by-gender/.

United States Census Bureau. (2021). QuickFacts – United States. https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fact/table/US/PST045221

Assistant Director Vs. Assistant to the Director

by

My professional title is Assistant Director. I work very closely with my Director, on work projects and in proximity to each other. Our office is very small and we have developed an intricate series of coordinated movements that keep us our chairs from banging into each other all day long. We have worked together for four years now. It is a great working relationship and we have even become friends outside of the workplace.

She is my boss though, which makes me think of our roles as leader and follower. When I first applied for the job of Assistant Director, I interpreted the role as Assitant to the Director, which would have been role-based (Northouse, 2019) working relationship. As the years have passed and we have settled in to our seperate strong suits I have realized that I am actually the Assitant Director of the preschool, not her assistant. Our leader-follower relationship has evolved from role-based to relational-based as we grew to trust each other and we learned each other’s strengths and weaknesses. Our relationship has redefined our roles. It works very well for us. I don’t ask her to take on tasks that require any advanced tech knowledge and she knows not to ask me any math problems that I can’t complete on a calculator.

Recently, the director had to quarantine at home for 24 days due to a potential covid exposure. We had just reopened our doors after being closed for almost a year. She was counting on me as was the staff. I had to handle some situations that I would not have had to deal with if she had been able to be at work. It was uncomfortable at times and pushed me way out of my comfort zone. I did a lot “fake it til you make it” things, such as handle a state licensing visit and our annual health inspection. It was the first time that I truly felt the growth that has occured in my role since I started four years ago. She is back now and I am glad. Not really because the work was hard but more because I was lonely and I missed my co-worker and friend. She recently joked that we should re-define our roles as Co-Directors. If that isn’t a relational leader-follower relationship than I don’t know what is.

Works Cited

Northouse, Peter. Leadership : Theory and Practice. 8th ed., Los Angeles Sage, 2019.

The issue with online group assignments

by

College has changed quite a bit since I first started taking college classes 20 years ago.  One of the most significant differences is the proliferation of online courses and degree programs.  These programs allow students to study and learn on a highly flexible schedule for a variety of different fields of study.  This is what influenced me to continue the college experience I started and finish my college degree.  Much like standard in-person classes, these online classes have varied in their difficulty and the challenges they present.  One of the most challenging aspects of the online environment has been the assignment of group projects.

In these group projects, the course instructor assigns team members either by random or based on a specified criterion.  One thing that is not assigned is roles, specifically a leader is not chosen.  Therefore, the leadership responsibilities are shared or distributed across team members.  “Shared team leadership occurs when member of the team take on leadership behaviors to influence the team and to maximize team effectiveness” (Northouse, 2016, p. 365).  For example, many of the teams I’ve worked with had to collaborate and develop consensus before a decision could be made.  Shared leadership is beneficial for virtual teams because it increases their effectiveness and aids in completing complex tasks (Northouse, 2016).  There are risks involved with shared leadership however, such as the case where none of the team members step forward to assume a leadership role (Northouse, 2016).  This is possibly due to the fact that in shared leadership situations members may not have the required leadership skills necessary for the role causing them to lack the confidence needed to step up (Northouse, 2016).  This occurred in one of my previous courses where a group assignment was due within 5 hours and no one had even attempted to establish communication with any of the team members.  I reluctantly e-mailed the members to ask if they were content with receiving a zero for the assignment.  Two of the team members responded and indicated they were interested in completing the assignment and so we managed to quickly complete the assignment with no help from two remaining members who either didn’t respond, or didn’t contribute.  Fortunately, this was an isolated occurrence as my other assigned teams have been more successful in working together to complete assignments.

One of the benefits to shared leadership is that all team members can actively monitor the critical leadership functions and determine the appropriate action to take in order to maximize team effectiveness (Northouse, 2016).  This is in line with the team leadership model, which focuses on a leader’s ability to appropriately diagnose the situation and take actions to enhance team effectiveness (Northouse, 2016).  The success of this in a shared leadership situation is partly dependent on the skills and commitment of the team members.  If they do not have the leadership skills necessary to diagnose the situation, they will not be able to take the appropriate action.  Additionally if they are not committed to the success of the team or the achievement of goals, they will neglect to take action regardless of the ability to effectively diagnose the situation.  This occurred in one of the teams of which I was a part, where we decided to equally distribute each part of the assignment.  Unfortunately, each part was dependent on a previous part of the assignment so we were all dependent on one another to complete it.  Regrettably the person to complete the first part of the assignment, while committed, did not have the skills to properly complete their part of the assignment.  This negatively affected the next person who did not have the commitment to recognize and adjust the initial part of the assignment and instead completed their portion without regards to the first, leaving a disjointed starting point for the third individual.  Once it got to the third individual, it was clear there was going to be a significant issue that needed to be addressed with the team and required committed and skillful leadership.  However, this was something our team lacked, and without it these virtual teams will not be able to fully maximize the effectiveness of shared leadership.

It could be argued that the reason our team struggled in these situations was because we were attempting to behave more like a group than as a team.  While group members may share a common goal and influence or interact with one another, they are not necessarily dependent on each other to accomplish their goal (PSU WC, 2019).  A team on the other hand, must work together and are dependent on one another to achieve their mutual goal (PSU WC, 2019).  Therefore, when my other team decided to work on separate parts of the assignment when it was clear that a collaborative effort was needed, our team was attempting to avoid the obvious truth that we were dependent on one another to complete the assignment.  Had we worked as a team, we would have all helped the first individual complete their portion of the assignment correctly and allowed the second person an easier time to complete their portion.  As another example, when my other team was not communicating with each other, we were individually avoiding the fact we dependent on one another to achieve our mutual goal, behaving more as a group than as a team.  In this particular case, the team may have also been affected by form of social loafing, which occurs when individuals decrease their efforts based on the level of perceived distributed responsibility for the outcome (PSU WC, 2019).  This was probably because there were no peer reviews for that particular group assignment.  It is clear that both of these teams were not effective in spite of eventually accomplishing the goal of completing the assignment, because they lacked certain characteristics that would have promoted them to behave more like a team, and less like a group.

Larson and LaFasto (1989) identified eight characteristics that were indicative of effective teams (Northouse, 2016).  The eight characteristics effective teams possess are: (1) a clear, elevating goal; (2) a results-driven structure; (3) competent team members; (4) a unified commitment; (5) a collaborative climate; (6) standards of excellence; (7) external support and recognition; and (8) principled leadership (Northouse, 2016; PSC WC, 2019).  When it comes to working in these assigned teams for online group assignments, there are a number of inherent challenges that inhibit or mitigate these characteristics from developing.   For example, the first characteristic is that effective teams have a clear and elevating goal (Northouse, 2016).  In the case of these assigned teams, the goals are presented clearly by the instructor, usually in the assignment instructions and syllabus.  It could be argued however, that the goal in and of itself is not necessarily elevating or motivating to the team members since the assignment requires the coordination that is not necessary when students work independently.  Another example of an inherently challenging factor is that team members are either assigned randomly, or based factors that do not consider competence or commitment.  Therefore, there is no way to secure the team will possess competent members, have a unified commitment, or have a collaborative climate.  This can cause a lot of internal strife when those whose goal is simply to pass are teamed with those whose goal is to get a perfect score.  While peer reviews help to mitigate this probability, the situation still allows for some students to exploit the efforts of others, promoting social loafing to some degree.  A final example is the possibility the team will lack the principle leadership needed to be effective because none of the team members posses the skills or desire to lead.  As these examples show, it is rather difficult for online student teams to possess a number of the characteristics that are indicative of effective teams, making their goals more difficult to achieve for reasons beyond the assignment itself.

In spite of these challenges many online course continue to promote group assignments as part of the curriculum.  This is because the proliferation of technology in the workforce has demanded that individuals have experience in working in virtual groups and teams.  An increased reliance on work teams has been due in part to the ever-growing complexity of required tasks as globalization and technology have driven a greater need to maintain a competitive advantage in the marketplace (Northouse, 2016).  Organizational teams provide a number of benefits such as “greater productivity, more effective use of resources, better decisions and problem solving, better-quality products and services, and greater innovation and creativity” (Northouse, 2016, p. 364).  With this in mind, it is evident the need for organizations to utilize and leverage teams will continue to grow.  However, having organizational teams does not guarantee organizational success.  This is why leadership is an important concept to consider regarding the increasing utilization of teams, in order to fully maximize the benefits they present.

I believe a number of my online group assignments could have benefited by having principled leadership.  “Leadership has been described as the central driver of team effectiveness” (Northouse, 2016, p. 371).  Because there is no guarantee that teams will possess members that have the skills or desire necessary to lead, I would suggest course instructors fill this role by actively monitoring groups.  For example, an instructor that assumes a leadership role of a group could utilize some of the tools presented in the Hill Model for Team Leadership (Northouse, 2016).  This model provides a mental map for determining what the team lacks and offers courses of actions for the leader in order to improve effectiveness (Northouse, 2016).  The first steps are to make three determinations.  Namely, determine whether action is necessary, if so determine whether the action is to address task or relational issues, and whether that action needs to be at an internal or external level of the team process (Northouse, 2016).  As an example, the instructor could require that students in the team utilize a discussion board they are able to actively monitor.  If the instructor sees the students are veering off track from the assignment goal, they could make the determination of whether to act and alert the students.   They could also determine if the issue stems from a task issues such as confusion on the assignment instructions, or relational issues such as disagreements between students. Finally, they could determine whether the issues are internal such as social loafing between members, or whether they are external such as the school’s server being unavailable.  The point is that instructors are in a unique position to overcome the inherent challenges these online assigned groups face.  They have the opportunity to demonstrate and communicate leadership principles that will maximize the effectiveness of the team and enhance the students overall focus on learning the course subject matter.

 

References

Northouse, P.G. (2016). Leadership: Theory and practice (7th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, Inc.

Pennsylvania State University World Campus. (2019). Lesson 9: Team Leadership. Retrieved from https://courses.worldcampus.psu.edu/canvas/fa19/21981–15196/content/09_lesson/printlesson.html

Women in leadership: Implementing change

by

As society attempts to adapt to the ever-changing perspectives of tolerance that we Americans have increasingly become aware of, it’s no surprise that there has been some resistance along the way. Whether it be expressed needs of diversity, political correctness regarding race, gender, sexuality, religious beliefs (or lack thereof) etc., we’ve encountered biases of the ‘old way of thinking’ that has prevented progressive developments of acceptance and tolerance the times are calling for. One particular area is gender-roles. In society, in the home, and in the workplace, gender-roles and societal expectations of these roles are changing and regardless of how far we might have come to implement changes, the biases of the ‘old days’ still remain.

Northouse (2016) notes that role congruity theory creates standards that favor men with specific manly traits required for fulfillment of successful leadership within the workplace. As a result, women and the traditional traits they are brought up to display such as warmth, friendliness, agreeableness, and expressive behavior (Moss, 2016), tend to create a double-edged sword for women in leadership or in addition, create a barrier to those who wish to be in leadership roles (Northouse, 2016). Traditional perspectives of leadership see masculine traits such as assertiveness and authoritativeness (just two of many masculine traits associated with traditional perspectives of leadership) as more appropriate for leadership roles (Northouse, 2016). Yet, when women display the traditional, masculine traits of leadership, they’re perceived as being less efficient and judged as not behaving in a femininely enough way (Northouse, 2016). So how can we overcome these more traditional, older lines of thought and bias to allow women to find equality and step into leadership roles if they so desire?

Northouse (2016) noted a few paths to change, one being for men in leadership to learn to overcome their biases and their tendency to  “succumb to homosocial reproduction,” meaning they need to overcome their desire to choose their replacements in leadership roles to be other men with the same lines of thought and beliefs as well as traits, behaviors, and even looks (pp.405-406). To help them overcome these biases, women can attempt to battle the double-edged sword by combining their “communal qualities such as warmth and friendliness with agentic qualities such as exceptional competence and assertiveness” (Carli, 2001; Rudman & Glick, 2001; as cited in Northouse, 2016, p.408). Northouse (2016) suggests that recent research has suggested that by doing so, women have helped shift leadership from the traditional perception of it needing masculine traits and behaviors to more androgynous, gender-fluid traits and behaviors.

Other ways these biases related to gender in leadership can be addressed are by increasing tolerance–seeing leaders as human rather than specifically of one gender or another, each “as deserving of respect and consideration as [the] other;” implementing policies and values, mission and vision statements that encourage dismissing the thoughts and beliefs that gender differentiates effectivity and ability to perform; and to remove the fallacy of gender wars and limited resources between genders, “[deconstructing] the narrative of limited good, or the idea that in order for women to gain ground, men must lose out” (Dzubinski & Diehl, 2018, p.59). Both men and women have the tendency as human beings to display both feminine and masculine traits and qualities within one single individual. We need to encourage the coming generations of leaders to embrace each other, learning to accept our differences as assets which contribute to a more diverse and collectively solid workforce capable of putting our differences aside and striving for greatness. We need to turn our focus towards greater successes as a team, transforming what has divided us in the past into successes for the future. We all have our differences, for once, let’s use them to our benefit and change our world as we know it.

 

 

References:

Carli, L.L. (2001). Gender and social influence. Journal of Social Issues, 57, 724-741. As cited in Northouse, P.G. (2016).

Dzubinski, L.M., & Diehl, A.B. (2018). The problem of gender essentialism and its implications for women in leadership. Journal of Leadership Studies, Vol. 12 (1), 56-61. Accessed November 19, 2018, from https://onlinelibrary-wiley-com.ezaccess.libraries.psu.edu/doi/full/10.1002/jls.21565

Moss, S. (2016). Social role theory. Sico tests. [website]. Accessed November 19, 2018, from https://www.sicotests.com/psyarticle.asp?id=77

Northouse, P.G. (2016). Leadership theory and practice, (7th ed.). Thousand Oaks, California: SAGE.

Rudman, L.A., & Glick, P. (2001). Prescriptive gender stereotypes and backlash toward agentic women. Journal of Social Issues, 57, 743-762. As cited in Northouse, P.G. (2016).

Skip to toolbar