Add category

Can Good Leadership Be Predicted Through Testing?

September 23, 2013 by psf5036

There are several different kinds of tests that employers use for predicting how well an employee will perform, how reliable a candidate may be, or as a way to compare between candidates to make final hiring decision. But is it possible to use this kind of testing to predict leadership abilities? Many of these tests such as the Wonderlic Personnel test evaluate for quick thinking, and logical thinking, quick decision making skills as well as comprehension of language and numeracy. All of these are important factors of intelligence that have shown to be a very valid indicator of future success. However, some elements of intelligence, like social intelligence and being able to handle situations in a diplomatic way is not really possible to be caught by a test. I also think that forward thinking, as in strategizing, is not really found well by these kinds of tests. I believe (but would obviously need to test in order to prove this) that there are plenty of excellent managers who are able to think strategically to ensure long term success of their company, reviewing multiple factors in the decisions they make and even in the types of long term goals that they set for themselves, their team and the company, but may not be very quick thinking when it comes to test taking and may not even have very good math skills or other kind of skills that impact their success on this kind of test.

This question has been examined by researchers. In fact, Hannah, Balthazard, Waldman Jennings and Thatcher examined leaders self concepts and how their ability to adapt and deal with situations of great complexity and their actual EEG brain patterns when given complex strategizing tasks are related. They discuss that “findings provide a deeper understanding of the latent and dynamic mechanisms that underpin leaders’ self-complexity and their adaptability” (2013)

In the following youtube video Dr Daniel Goleman discusses how social intelligence (how you read people, what you take in and ‘hear’ how well you react etc) has been shown to be the most important indicator of good leadership. So it would seem that intelligence testing wouldn’t really be able to provide the best prediction of good leadership skills, because the intelligence they test for do not include social and emotional intelligence.

references

Hannah, S. T., Balthazard, P. A., Waldman, D. A., Jennings, P. L., & Thatcher, R. W. (2013). The psychological and neurological bases of leader self-complexity and effects on adaptive decision-making. Journal of Applied Psychology, 98(3), 393-411. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0032257

Power Struggle

June 10, 2013 by aam184

The struggle for power is a frequent theme in many classes that I have taken at Penn State (including: Criminal Justice, Introduction to Political Science, Employment Law, Leadership in Work Settings, and even Literary Humor). Power is a recurrent theme in higher learning and in society. The need for power is in an important topic especially in the business world. The reasons why people seek powerful positions can provide insight to the outcome of their leadership role. People that seek power to only satisfy their own needs may not be as effective as a leader as people that seek power to change and benefit the organization.

Personalized power describes people that tend to abuse power because their ultimate goal is to fulfill their own needs without regards to the organization, as a whole. People that need personalized power share common traits such as; selfishness, impulsivity, and are lacking in self-control (PSU WC L 7., p. 6). If the ultimate motive for power is pure selfishness, the outcome is less likely to be positive (especially for the followers). If the motive behind power is socialized power, the outcome is more likely to be positive. Socialized power is the motive to attain power to benefit the greater good of the organization. The common traits for people that utilize this kind of power are altruistic and compassion. It is easy to see how the relationship between the leader and the followers would be a better relationship than that of people that need personalized power.

“Power tends to corrupt,” said Lord Acton, the 19th-century British historian. “Absolute power corrupts absolutely” (Shea, 2012, para. 1). I think of this quote every time that power is discussed, especially throughout my courses. Abuse of power is inevitable. Power can change people but I do not think it changes people who are inherently good into bad people. Pre-existing ethical tendencies are heightened by power (Shea, 2012). People with personalized power as a motivator, given more power, can easily become consumed with obtaining more power and staying powerful. The unethical choices that those leaders choose to make throughout their rise to power will impact their staying power.

Ideally, people want to follow leaders that do not abuse their power but use their power positively influence others to reach an outcome that benefits everyone. Followers will feel alienated if the leader is only fulfilling self-serving needs. In order to decrease the amount of abuse of power, it is essential to empower people with unselfish needs and wants. Empowering people who are going to make positive changes should result in a better outcome than allowing people in power to continually abuse that power. The struggle for power will remain a constant, as followers want to gain their own power to gain leverage in a given situation.

References

Penn State World Campus (2013). PSYCH 485 Lesson 7: Power and Influence. Retrieved on June 4, 2013, from https://courses.worldcampus.psu.edu/su13/psych485/001/content/07_lesson/06_page.html.

Shea, C. (2012, October). Why Power Corrupts . Smithsonian, Retrieved from http://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/Why-Power-Corrupts-169804606.html.

Managing Stress

June 2, 2013 by aam184

<!– /* Font Definitions */ @font-face {font-family:Cambria; panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4; mso-font-charset:0; mso-generic-font-family:auto; mso-font-pitch:variable; mso-font-signature:3 0 0 0 1 0;} /* Style Definitions */ p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal {mso-style-parent:""; margin-top:0in; margin-right:0in; margin-bottom:10.0pt; margin-left:0in; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-font-family:Cambria; mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-theme-font:minor-bidi;} a:link, span.MsoHyperlink {color:blue; text-decoration:underline; text-underline:single;} a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed {mso-style-noshow:yes; color:purple; text-decoration:underline; text-underline:single;} @page Section1 {size:8.5in 11.0in; margin:1.0in 1.25in 1.0in 1.25in; mso-header-margin:.5in; mso-footer-margin:.5in; mso-paper-source:0;} div.Section1 {page:Section1;} —

Stress in an inevitable part of work and everyday life. In order to manage stress, we must first recognize our stressors (both positive and negative). The two types of stress are Eustress and Distress. Eustress is positive stress that motivates and is perceived within our coping abilities. Distress is negative stress that increases anxiety and is perceived outside our coping abilities (Macabasco, n.d.). Eustress can be beneficial to work assignments whereas Distress decreases performance. Not dealing with stress can affect your health, your relationships, and your productivity at work. Learning and implementing effective ways to manage stress is a crucial part of leadership.

People that are in leadership positions have a vast amount of responsibilities. Leaders are responsible for their own actions, as well as the actions and outcomes of their subordinates. The position of power that is associated with a leader can result in additional stress. Effective leaders know how to handle their job responsibilities and manage their levels of stress. Efficient problem solving skills are necessary for a leader to have. Levels of stress can be reduced when leaders know how to deal with the problems that arise at work. Time-management is another important skills to have when dealing with problems and working on reducing stress (Northouse, 2013).

Balance is a key component to managing stress. Maintaining a separate work life and personal life is important. Avoid bringing your work problems home and your personal problems to work. This is something that is much easier said than done. Inevitably emergencies do occur in life and at work. Asking for help is not a sign of weakness. Seeking help in crucial situations can help decrease stress because you are dealing with the situation. Ignoring problems causes stress to increase. The more Distress one face, the harder it is to solve problems.

Learning how to relax is another key component to managing stress. Knowing how to relax can help you stay calm under pressure. According to HelpGuide (2013) “Relaxation techniques such as yoga, meditation, and deep breathing to activate the body’s relaxation response, a state of restfulness that is the opposite of the stress response” (para. 17). Taking time to relax is crucial for your wellbeing. Too much Distress can cause serious health problems. Everyone faces time constraints, daily stressors, and pressure. An effective leader knows how to manage stress regardless of the situation.

References

HelpGuide. (2013). Stress Symptoms, Signs and Causes. Retrieved from http://www.helpguide.org/mental/stress_signs.htm.

Macabasco, L. (n.d.). 2 Different Kinds of Stress Which Make-or-Break a Person. Retrieved from http://www.lifehack.org/articles/lifestyle/2-different-kinds-of-stress-which-make-or-break-a-person.html.

Northouse, P. G. (2013). Leadership: Theory and Practice (6th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Productions.

Leadership

May 20, 2013 by aam184

This past week of PSYCH 485 has allowed me to reflect on my experiences with leadership. When defining leadership, my own perceptions come into play. What happens when you are being lead by a person who is not an effective leader? The outcome of that situation would be bleak since leadership depends on the relationship between the leader and the followers (Northouse, 2013).

A strong leader that leads by example motivates the worker to do his or her best work. Strong communication skills are imperative. Actively listening is an essential part of communicating. Making people feel that they are an important part of the team helps stimulate a positive work environment.

Feeling a sense of accomplishment provides positive reinforcement. Not every leader leads by positive example. I am fortunate to never have experienced a boss that used scare-tactics. In this blog, I have written the word “positive” numerous times. I think surrounding yourself with positive people is important in life. Working for a negative leader could create a toxic work environment.

Lesson 3 on the Psychodynamic Approach resonated with me because another course I am taking (CMLIT 105: Literary Humor) is discussing the same topics: Freud, repression, and archetypes. The Warrior and the Magician are two archetypes common in the work force. “The warrior represses his/her feelings and wants to be seen as confident. The warrior works for the money” (PSU WC L 3., p. 8). This is certainly prevalent in the business world. I have yet to encounter the Magician, who works for the reward of working and is seemingly the “ideal” leader (PSU WC L 3., p. 8).

References

Northouse, P. G. (2013). Leadership: Theory and Practice (6th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Productions.

Penn State World Campus (2013). PSYCH 485 Lesson 3: Introduction to leadership. Retrieved on May 18, 2013,https://courses.worldcampus.psu.edu/su13/psych485/001/content/03_lesson/08_page.html.

People of Equal Talent

May 17, 2013 by aec5297

Today, I read a quote in my Facebook page from the Richard Dawkins Foundation for Reason and Science that left me thinking. It was a Stephen Jay Could’s quote, and it said: “I am, somehow, less interested in the weight and convolutions of Einstein’s brain than in the near certainty that people of equal talent have lived and died in cotton fields and sweat-shops.” I would be important to notice that the Jay Gould I am referring to was not a sociologist – neither the railroad developer – but an eminent American paleontologist and evolutionary biologist. I was happy to share the quote.

The study of leadership should be oriented not only to the examination of successful leaders, or to determine what traits, personality, or psychological profile those people had. It should explore what situations in which a person was able to lead arrived to successful outcomes for the benefit of the whole team, group, institution country, or any other entity of interest. And it should find ways in which the common woman and man could find their own virtues and the strength needed to lead or follow, as best would suit their interest, and thrive by doing it.

The Psychodynamic Approach is based on case studies. This presents a real problem to the goal of generalizing because the data is not valid from the scientific point of view (Northouse, 2010, p. 339). It does not use the procedures of standard social science practices such as quantitative and qualitative research methods (Stech, 2004). On the other hand, this approach is based on psychology of the abnormal; the work of Sigmund Freud (Northouse, 2010, p. 326). Psychodynamic, as the trait approach – which states that the characteristics of a person or traits will be the elements that will allow the person to attain leadership – does not consider other variables. It does not acknowledge that to arrive to leadership other elements such as the culture of the organization, organizational factors, and other singular challenges may intervene in the process (Northouse, 2010, p. 340).

I find the Psychodynamic approach particularly troubling as a tool to achieve successful leadership, especially in a working environment. It requires people to talk about their relationships and open up in an intimate way, and this is difficult for many people (Stech, 2004, p. 204). I assume it may become more bothersome when a working position is in play. Since emotional responses are a big part of the approach, leaders are moved to open up and confront their issue in training sessions and real life situations (Stech, 2004, p. 202). In some cases, they take the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator, which according to Northouse presents many limitations and is unreliable given the fact that “they were not professional test developers” (2010), and later they discuss the results (Stech, 2004). These recognition and acceptance of each other’s personality at time gives space to jokes and fun. Such an openness leads to a delicate issue, ethics, since the intimate life of the individuals should not be used to abuse or misuse in favor or against the person (Stech, 2004, p. 203). I find this extremely difficult if not impossible. Even family members at times cannot avoid using intimate knowledge from the person they love to take some emotional advantage or try to “help”, when help is not required. What about when there is a job position in between of those emotions unethically manipulated?

From my point of view, the trait is not acceptable. At times it is absurdly low, as when in 1959 Mann classified leaders and non-leaders by six traits: intelligence, masculinity, adjustment, dominance, extraversion, and conservatism. If we understand feminity as a person that has traditionally qualities commonly ascribed to women, as sensitivity and gentleness, as dictionary.com defines it (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/feminine?s=t), I personally find the images of Evita, Eleanor Roosevelt, Mother Teresa, Indira Gandhi, and some others to be quite feminine; many of which were not very conservative and died before Mann created his classification. In other words, they don’t fit Mann’s definition very well.

My little knowledge about leadership tells me that there may be better ways to explore leadership rather than falling into limited classifications of traits and not very reliable personality characters. I am looking forward to learn about other approaches closer to Northouse’s definition of leadership, as a process, or interactive not linear event, that involves influences, occurs within groups, involves common goals, and is available to everyone (Northouse, 2010, p. 5).

Northouse, P. G. (2010). Leadership: Theory and Practice (5th edition). Thousand Oaks, California: Sage Publications.

Stech, E. L. (2004). Psychodynamic approach. 2004) Leadership: Theory and Practice, 3rd Edition, London: Sage.