Leadership

PSYCH 485 blog

Servant Leadership Taught by an Information Security Manager

by

Out of all the theories that I have read about, servant leadership has greatly impacted me. I must confess, though, that I might have some bias towards this specific leadership approach over the others due to moments I can recall from my past where various leaders taught me about the importance of serving others. For example, church leaders taught me to uphold the principles of serving those in need. I remember as a kid being directed to a passage in the bible, “For even the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many” (Mark 10:45, New International Version). Additionally, I was often reminded of a famous phrase that stated, “Jesus served with the heart of a king but ruled with the heart of a servant” (Johnson, 2013, p. 6). As a kid, hearing this phrase became a conundrum for me, as I had a hard time wrapping my head around how one individual could hold two roles simultaneously (Northouse, 2019). However, while I thought that this phrase was just about the assignment of holding two roles, I learned it was more about performing the actions associated with these roles (Northouse, 2019). Although the preceding sentences in this paragraph reveal how I came to learn about servant leadership through my religious upbringing, the most significant lessons passed down to me about how to effectively employ servant leadership occurred in a corporate environment and came from my very first information security manager.

Northouse (2019) noted that servant leadership is accomplished when a leader is receptive to their follower’s necessities and desires. A “servant leader” is not a self-serving individual but someone that is self-giving to others (Northouse, 2019). This type of leadership process works in favor of the follower, as the leader places the follower first and recognizes the value of the follower’s role in the leader-follower relationship established between them (Northouse, 2019). Even though there is a concentrated focus on the follower, a leader also benefits from servant leadership. Northouse (2019) developed a servant leadership model (incorporating data from several servant leadership researchers) that described servant leaders as demonstrating behaviors such as “conceptualizing,” “emotional healing,” “putting followers first,” “helping followers grow and succeed,” “behaving ethically,” “empowering,” and “creating value for the community” (p. 235). When exercised by leaders, these types of behaviors give rise to ethical conduct that leadership researchers have discovered leads to better responses from followers (Northouse, 2019). In addition to the supportive following resulting from the behaviors previously mentioned, leaders also have a guide for improving their leadership skills (Northouse, 2019). This means that a leader who seeks to fulfill a servant leadership role will continually evaluate their behaviors to meet the expectations of that role. As a result, this continuous self-assessment produces positive results not just for the follower but also for the leader (Northouse, 2019).

When I reflect on my first information security manager’s leadership, I can see how his attitude and behavior toward helping his followers were fundamental for much of the success our team achieved in the organization and our careers. Northouse (2019) highlighted Robert K. Greenleaf’s (founder of servant leadership studies) claim that communities will experience the effects of servant leadership. I remember my manager telling me that he was helping me develop and grow and that it was my responsibility to pay it forward to those that surrounded me, reverberating Greenleaf’s claim. He also mentioned that he was feeding into my life in the event that he ever found himself working for me. What sounded like a comical proclamation was really his servant leadership in action. He was bolstering my confidence, supporting my career aspirations, strengthening my work ethic, helping improve my skills, and overall shaping me up to be a better person (Northouse, 2019). My manager understood that it was not primarily about being at the top and above everyone else; it was about helping others become more successful and better than him. What resulted from this was a ripple effect. Our team also projected this ideology and made great efforts to help others (Northouse, 2019). We did not expect recognition or awards; my manager taught us that we help others because it is the right thing to do as a servant leader (Northouse, 2019).

My first information security manager was extremely intelligent and very knowledgeable in multiple areas of study, but most of all, incredibly humble. I believe this is why he was so effective at improving his servant leadership role in our organization because he was willing to continually work on his “seven servant leader behaviors” (Northouse, 2019, p. 235). Beginning with “conceptualizing,” my manager knew that if he was going to be successful at building strong relationships with other departments in the organization, he would need to align himself with the organization’s overall vision and other departments (Northouse, 2019). Therefore, he scheduled time to meet with other teams (contributing to our processes) to learn how they operated and how our team could help them accomplish their goals (Northouse, 2019). His “emotional healing” behavior supported this type of awareness. My manager was great at actively listening to others and empathizing with their situations, which allowed him to respond with the appropriate solutions for problems, especially those faced by his followers (Northouse, 2019). I cannot recall a time when my manager failed at “putting others first.” He looked out for his followers’ well-being, and above all, he strived to elevate his followers’ roles in the organization by often recognizing them in front of his own leadership (Northouse, 2019). His love for “helping followers grow and succeed” was why many followers held him in high regard and considered him a great mentor (Northouse, 2019). He taught us that you should never stop learning and showed us how, allocating 4 hours of his Saturday mornings to complete study, because as Will Durant once said: “We are what we repeatedly do. Excellence, then, is not an act, but a habit.” My manager sure lived up to that quote. “Behaving ethically” was no stranger to him, as he maintained transparency with his followers, showed no favoritism to any team members, and always had justifiable reasons for his decisions (Northouse, 2019). As a follower, I appreciated my manager’s “empowering” behavior. I was just beginning my career in information security, and my manager was willing to take on the risk of assigning major projects to me. This experience taught me about failure and how to overcome it, but most of all strengthened by confidence and work ethic (Northouse, 2019). I am proud to say that my manager is now heavily involved in “creating value for the community.” Currently, he is a vice president for a non-profit organization that helps military veterans and underprivileged youth obtain jobs in the technology field. A student from his non-profit organization was hired during my employment with former company, and she delivered some of the best work I had ever seen. Witnessing this event was another lesson learned from my manager about the importance of linking “the purposes and goals of an organization with the broader purposes of the community” (Northouse, 2019, p. 237).

My first information security manager instilled many principles in me, aligned to what has been described in the preceding paragraphs. I have seen how exhibiting servant leadership behaviors have generated some of the best work in an organization, boosted employee morale, and uplifted teams’ spirits (Northouse, 2019). I will forever be indebted to my first information security manager. Not only did he take a chance on bringing in a new candidate (me) without any experience in the information security field, but he taught me the value of being a servant leader. He showed me that by thinking about others and putting their priorities first, one could build solid and lasting relationships with individuals that will show up in a time of need for solutions (Northouse, 2019). He educated me on why empathizing with others could help identify the root cause of their issues and find solutions for alleviating their stress levels (Northouse, 2019). He reminded me that you never know where someone may end up in the future; therefore, you should always be willing to put them first and contribute to their personal growth and achievements (Northouse, 2019). He challenged me to remain just in all my actions, making sure to never compromise my integrity (Northouse, 2019). He encouraged me to have faith in others’ abilities and practice patience with their failures, as this leads to strengthening confidence in others (Northouse, 2019). Finally, he has continued to prove that what I have learned has no limitations and can cause a lasting impact in our communities (Northouse, 2019). I am sincerely thankful to this gentleman for helping me excel in my field, motivating me to put my best effort into everything I do, and inspiring me to pass on my lessons learned to others so they can achieve greater successes than me (Northouse, 2019). In the end, these strong leadership principles passed down by strong leaders will persist. As a leader, it is one’s duty, it is one’s responsibility, and it is just the right thing to do.

 

References:

Johnson, B. (2006). Dreaming with God: Secrets to Redesigning Your World Through God’s Creative Flow. Shippenburg, PA: Destiny Image.

New International Version Bible. (2011). The NIV Bible. https://www.thenivbible.com (Original work published 1978)

Northouse, P.G. (2019). Leadership: Theory and Practice. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.

Globalization, Culture and Leadership Challenges

by

Globalization is defined as “the increased interdependence between nations” on economic, social, technical and political fronts (Northouse, 2016, p. 427).”  Increased globalization in recent years has created new leadership challenges as well as the need for leaders to increase their understanding of different cultures and diverse work forces.  Overseas assignments and working abroad has been happening for decades, however.  De la Garza (2009) indicated that the 1980s saw many studies focused on identifying the characteristics of leaders and business executives best suited to lead in multicultural contexts.  This lead to a term in international business known as cultural intelligence.  Cultural intelligence is defined as being skilled and flexible in understanding cultures, learning from multicultural interactions and then adjusting personal thinking and behavior to interact appropriately with other people from different cultures (Thomas & Inkson, 2004 as cited in De la Garza et al, 2009).

Cultural intelligence is critical now more than ever with increased globalization.  According to Northouse (2016), leaders also have to become more competent in diverse, cross-cultural awareness and practice.  Adler and Bartholomew (1992, as cited in Northouse, 2016) suggested that leaders had to develop five cross-cultural competencies.  Amongst them was the need to be highly skilled in working with people from many cultures, as well as being able to adapt to living, communicating and relating with people from other cultures from “a position of equality rather than cultural superiority (Adler & Bartholomew, 1992 as cited in Northouse, 2016, p. 428)”.

Research on cultural intelligence indicated that it has three components: cognitive, motivational, and behavioral components. Trevino (2017) summarizes this and provides a version with two parts: the cognitive part, which relates to the person’s knowledge about the new culture, and the action part, which is the ability to translate that knowledge and motivation into an action.  This supports what Northouse suggests in saying that leaders need to be more competent in both behaviors and practice.  These cross-cultural competencies, however, are not only critical for leaders, they are also important for spouses and families who accompany them to assignments abroad.

We see this all too often in the military; in fact, it is essentially a way of life for many of our military families.  Studies indicate that diversity and cross-cultural training for spouses and partners of employees working abroad is equally important for them as it is for the employee.  Trevino (2017) suggests that the higher the position of the employee, the more likely it is that their partner also has functions or roles of “ambassador” for the company. This suggests that adapting to a new culture is critical for everyone, including families in global positions or jobs.  Fortunately, our families do receive the necessary training to assist in overcoming potential cultural barriers when we move to locations overseas.

Research indicates that there are some barriers, however, that are not explicitly presented and that there are factors that affect intercultural communication. This is particularly relevant in negotiation processes or between implicit and explicit communication.  For example, in countries like the United States, it is very common for people to say what they think explicitly, clearly and unambiguously.  On the other hand, in other countries such as Japan, people use more implicit languages and communications that are less clear.  For example, a person can answer the following to an unacceptable offer, “Thank you … I will consider your request very carefully.” For an American, this can easily mean that the discussion will continue and that the matter will be reconsidered in the future.  However, in Japanese culture (and in other cultures in which it is a common practice to avoid direct conflict), the message is clearly a “NO”.  My spouse and I received cross-cultural training when we first arrived in Japan, and I vividly remember when our host said, “In Japan, we don’t say NO, we just don’t tell you YES”.  We all laughed as she smiled modestly.

I would suggest that as leaders, we have to be familiar with the cultures, countries and places we operate in, but we must also be highly skilled in interacting with diverse groups.  According to Northouse (2016, p. 430), “a skilled leader needs to find ways to negotiate with followers from various cultural backgrounds.”  With increased globalization, this is critical now more than ever, and we must ensure that our organizations are implementing the right training strategies to assist us, other employees and families in overcoming diversity and cultural challenges.

References

De la Garza, M., Guzmán-Soria, E., Hernández-Soto, D. (2009). Cultural and personal considerations in international negotiations.  Journal of Globalization, Competitiveness & Governability, vol. 3, pp. 64-89

Northouse, P.G. (2016). Leadership: Theory and Practice (7th ed). Los Angeles, CA: Sage Publications.

Trevino, L. (2017). Managing Business Ethics: Straight Talk about How to Do it Right (7th edition). John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Are leaders born, made or poorly chosen?

by

            I have been in the military for nearly two decades and have followed many leaders throughout my career.  To this day, I contemplate about memorable supervisors in an effort to gain a fundamental understanding of why they did some of the things they did.  I remember them for different reasons and even try to emulate the qualities I most admired from each one.  Amongst the great ones, I also remember the bad, the indifferent, and those who often times made me wonder how they even got to influential leadership positions in the first place.  I have worked for the anecdotal natural born leaders, others who appeared well trained and some who were simply the by-product their superior’s power and influence.

            Leadership traits were of high interest throughout the 20th century, and their studies resulted in “great man” theories that focused on identifying characteristics and qualities possessed by great leaders (Northouse, 2016).  Scholars suggested that social, political and military leaders all had similar innate traits that only “great” people were born with.  Throughout the years, characteristics such as intelligence, confidence, motivation and sociability have been linked to leadership effectiveness.  Indeed, I have come across the charismatic supervisor who effortlessly outshines others, and excels at most things as if it all simply comes “naturally” to them.  They certainly appear to be born, natural leaders who people gravitate to as if they had no other choice.

            On the other hand, I have also had supervisors whose leadership skills were sharpened by experience, education and coaching from mentors who deliberately focused on their development as military leaders.  Albeit effective, leadership did not seem to come natural to them; instead, they had a polished approach that often times seemed scripted but was effective nonetheless.  In contrast to the “great man” theories that suggest leaders are born, the skills approach to leadership focuses on capabilities that can be learned and developed.  More recently, Mumford and colleagues developed a skill-based model of leadership using the results of a study founded by the U.S. Army and the Department of Defense.  They concluded that capabilities can be developed through education and experience, and that problem-solving skills, social judgement skills, and knowledge can account for effective leadership performance (Northouse, 2016).  Leadership is therefore, or perhaps, something that many people can do and not an opportunity only reserved for the gifted few.

            Often times, my most memorable supervisors integrated traits such as intelligence and confidence with acquired skills such as knowledge and problem-solving.  However, I also worked for ineffective “leaders” who had neither traits nor skill but held a key position assigned by someone with greater influence and power to make it happen.  I once heard the term “legacy child”, which referred to someone whose father was a high-ranking officer in the military.  As such, he had been vectored or “chosen” for jobs that would likely catapult him up the military chain of command even if he lacked the skills or abilities to lead high-performing teams.  I now realize that instead of skills, some people can learn and exhibit the right behaviors to come across as an effective leader in front of others.

            The behavioral approach to leadership focuses on the actions of the leader, on what they do and how they act (Northouse, 2016).  There are five basic styles: 1) country-club management, 2) team management, 3) middle-of-the-road management, 4) impoverished management, and 5) authority-compliance management.  Furthermore, there is another concept under this theory that encompasses all five styles.  Opportunism, according to Northouse (2016), refers to someone “who uses a combination of the five basic styles for the purpose of personal advancement (pg 77).”  It is likely that some legacy children and others in the military may see, learn and exhibit behaviors to gain personal advancement.  Consequently, they are chosen for jobs they do not deserve and placed into positions for which they are ill prepared.

            Decades of experience have taught me that we must learn as much from the bad leaders as we do from the good.  Through the study of leadership, I have fortunately gained a better understanding of how and why my most memorable supervisors acted the way they did to effectively lead and manage their teams.  Like other things, leadership is something people may be naturally good at, but that doesn’t negate the fact that we must also be intentional in honing the skills and abilities we need to become better, more effective leaders.           

References

Northouse, P.G. (2016). Leadership: Theory and Practice (7th ed). Los Angeles, CA: Sage Publications.

How the Best Built Shoes are Acquired

by

Oprah has famously said, “I still have my feet on the ground, I just wear better shoes.”  If the success of one’s life is measured in the quality of the shoes he or she wears, Oprah reigns supreme.  Just how has she achieved this kind of success?  Oprah was born very poor in rural Mississippi in 1954.  She rose above labels of poor, black, female in midcentury America and carved her path to success by getting great grades in high school, winning scholarships, and then procuring her own television show.  What propelled her past the judgements attached to the color of her skin, the origin of her birth and the gender inequality assumptions of her sex?  Her ability to connect, to inspire, her willingness to be vulnerable – to be seen for who she really is. Oprah having her feet still planted firmly on the ground lends itself directly in her being humble, self-aware and someone who exemplifies great emotional intelligence.

Northouse (2016) defines emotional intelligence (EI) as the ability to expertly grasp your own and other’s emotions, and use these emotions effectively to make decisions that benefit your life and your relationships with others.  Someone with great EI guides others productively and are empathetic and conscientious (Northouse, 2016).  All of these traits can be perfectly ascribed to Oprah Winfrey.  If building quality relationships with others is a one of the measures of emotional intelligence, Oprah would be at the apex.  Jeremy Young, the author of The Age of Charisma, defines charisma as a relationship between leaders and followers (Shonfeld, 2018).  Young asserts that Oprah is “the single most charismatic person in America” (Shonfeld, 2018, para 5).  EI has its foundation from the trait theory of leadership.  Trait theory focuses on the leader themselves, and what traits a leader would possess to be considered effective in different situations (Northouse, 2016).  Arguably, Oprah embodies many of the traits positively associated with leadership, as well as knowing how to expertly apply those traits within the right situations.

William Bennis (2009) writes, “Leaders are capable of achieving their vision exactly because they are focused on their followers and feel their pain, desires and needs” (p. 65).  In 1988, Oprah started her own production company OWN, because she wanted to be in control of her show’s content and not be made to include content like her contemporaries at the time were producing referred to as “tabloid tv.”  Ratings fell, but quickly came back up (“Oprah Winfrey Biography”, (2018).  She ended up being more successful and carving her own unique niche in the tv market because she stayed true to her vision – that she wanted to make a difference in people’s lives and guide them into being their most authentic selves.  She advocates shifting one’s focus or end goal from success, to service (Winfrey, n.d.). In this, she uses her emotional intelligence to go against the status quo and made something new and deeply affecting.

Carl Jung once said, “The shoe that fits one person pinches another; there is no recipe for living that fits all cases” (Goodreads, n.d.).  How unique we all are; in the way that we are raised.  We are all the sum of our experiences.  We all have found our own way either by the fault of where we started, or in spite of where we have been – it is our decision which path we move on. Oprah Winfrey came from an environment of poverty and abuse that leads many to be antisocial and disassociated (Evans, 2016).  Instead, Oprah understood that deep down we were meant to connect and care for each other – that division equals conflict and is destructive. She has used her emotional intelligence to lead us to better hearing each other, and asking another, “What is your story – let me understand you and what you have been through.”  She has shown us what really hearing someone looks like.

Her impact as an adept servant leader and her unwavering emotional intelligence she exudes has led many to call for her to run for President in 2020 – our greatest leadership position.  What greater honor and testament to what she has meant to people over the years than that kind of call to action?  Oprah leads by her heart and head, equally intelligent, equally strong.

 

Resources

Bennis, W. (2009). On becoming a leader. New York, NY: Basic Books.

Biography.com editors (2018). Oprah Winfrey biography. Retrieved from https://www.biography.com/people/oprah-winfrey-9534419

Evans, G. W. (2016, December 27). Childhood poverty and adult psychological well-being. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 113(52) DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1604756114

Goodreads, (n.d.). The shoe that fits one person pinches another; there is no recipe for living that fits all cases. Retrieved from https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/85057-the-shoe-that-fits-one-person-pinches-another-there-is

Northouse, P.G. (2016). Leadership: Theory and practice. (7th ed.). Los Angeles, CA: SAGE Publishing.

Shonfeld, Z. (2018, January 12). Oprah Winfrey is the most charismatic person in America—and yes, she really could be president.  Newsweek.com. Retrieved from https://www.newsweek.com/2018/02/02/oprah-winfrey-president-campaign-golden-globes-777508.html

Winfrey, O. (n.d.). What Oprah knows for sure about finding success. Retrieved from http://www.oprah.com/omagazine/what-oprah-knows-for-sure-about-finding-success

 

 

 

The situation behind Airman development

by

As a senior non-commissioned officer in the United States Air Force, Airman-development is one of my highest, personal and professional, responsibilities. Ensuring my Airmen are trained, prepared and ready to fight is a matter of life and death. If I fail to motivate, inspire and arm them with the tools and resources they require to succeed, the mission will fail. This is why the study and understanding of leadership is developed within all Airmen from their earliest enlisted professional military education experiences. One of the first leadership models I studied was the Situational Leadership Model, developed by Ken Blanchard and Dr. Paul Hersey, which is based on W. J. Reddin’s 3-D management style theory during 1967 (Northouse, 2016, p. 93).

The study of this model officially began when I was promoted to staff sergeant in 2002 and enrolled in Airman Leadership School. The school is the first enlisted professional military education course young Airmen experience, and lasts about six weeks. There are other schools they attend at various milestones throughout their career, all of which are geared to develop them into the best Airmen possible. While the flow and delivery of the lesson principles has changed over the years, the principles have remained relatively as I remember them. The first block of instruction we encounter is the course foundation. It is within this instruction, within the first days of our entry into our first leadership education experience, that we learn about the Situational Leadership Theory, which is built into the chapter known as “Full Range Leadership Development,” (ALDLC, 2017, p. 138). It is here that the Air Force starts the leadership discussion on how a subordinate’s development level should impact a leader’s approach to the situation. The unfortunate reality is though, that the Air Force has to pack in a ton of content in that six-week period, thus restricting their discussion of Situational Leadership Theory to 263 words and the graphic depicting the model. My hope is that this theory isn’t lost under the weight of all the course content – because it is extremely applicable to the daily lives of Airmen.

One of the key reasons why it is so applicable, is because of it is prescriptive, not descriptive (Northouse, 2016, p. 99). It actually tells you how to lead within situations. This is great for new leaders because situations may be a bit overwhelming and they may not have a robust history full of experience to help guide them. How does this work? As Figure 5.1, taken from Northouse (2016, p. 95) explains, leaderships styles vary amid directive and supportive behaviors. Directive behaviors establish goals, set timelines, define roles, clarify responsibilities, and are often one-way (Northouse, 2016, p. 94). On the other hand, supportive behaviors are often two-way and help folks feel comfortable and show social and emotional support (Northouse, 2016, p. 94).

The degree of each behavior as it relates to the other determines the style of leadership, whether that be directing, coaching, supporting, or delegating. The appropriate style can then be utilized with the follower depending on where they are within the various levels of development. The word “with” is italicized for a very specific reason. As Blanchard Research and Training India LLP (2014) explain, these leadership styles are not something done to followers, but with them as partners [1:00]. This increases transparency and understanding within the relationship and aids in building trust.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aDHpyr6nlwQ

One of the most intriguing elements of the situational approach is how the development levels have aligned with my personal experiences of Airman development. It’s important to note that there really is not any substantial research to back up how commitment varies along the situational leadership model, it happens to be one of the main criticisms of the theory itself (Northouse, 2016, p. 101). In any case, in my personal experience, the model reflects the reality I have come to understand over 20 years of service.

After an Airman graduates basic training, they progress onto a technical school. From there, they move to their first duty station, which is where we then take lead on their development. When they first arrive, they really don’t know their jobs well but they are incredibly excited and eager to be great Airmen. In the SLII model, they would fall under “D1,” or low competence and high commitment. At this point, we pretty much have to show and tell them exactly what to do, because they want to do it, they just don’t know how yet. After some time, the Airman begins to understand their jobs and what they really got themselves into. They start to indoctrinate into the military culture and awaken to the realities that surround them – and it is not always positive. Life in the military is really challenging. This oftentimes discourages them and they become disillusioned. They would now be considered in “D2” or low competence, low commitment. It is at this point the coaching style becomes really important. While we still need to set goals and explain the mission, we need to be more supportive on the socioemotional side of the house to help keep their energy up and build their understanding of why we live the way we live and why we do the things we do as a military.

As the Airman continues to develop over the years, their skills begin to sharpen but they may still not be fully indoctrinated into the culture. It has yet to become part of them. They are now “D3,” or high competence, variable commitment. It is here that we transition into the supportive style. We want to start empowering Airmen to accomplish their mission. As The Airman Handbook (2015) explains, “by allowing Airmen flexibility in how they implement the vision, the leader successfully allows others to take ownership of the vision and experience pride in achieving it,” (p. 249). With perseverance and care, Airmen will begin to understand the why behind the military lifestyle and their motivations will align with their confidence and ability to conduct the mission. They have made it to “D4,” or high competence, high commitment. Now, we can truly start to delegate the mission because they are fully competent and able to get the job done.

The one key element to situational leadership is that the approach isn’t determined by the development of the Airman holistically, but of the Airman’s capabilities within specific situations. The Penn State World Campus lesson commentary explained how a coach would treat their teams differently if they were playing a championship team versus a last place team, (p. 10). This is an important distinction. In my current organization, I have a non-commissioned officer who is exceptional at his primary duties, but believes his role in leadership is to direct his subordinates through e-mail alone. He takes no responsibility for development at all. So while I can delegate specific primary duties to him, I am having to continually coach him on how to best lead and manage his people. Being an Airman is much more than primary duties alone. We need to understand that the development of our Airmen is the single-most important responsibility we non-commissioned officers bear. It is our Airmen who accomplish the mission with our leadership and guidance. If we simply sit behind a computer and direct action without properly training them and guiding them along their career trajectory, there is simply no hope they’ll ever reach the highest levels of development. If they never reach them, then we will never sustain the force required to protect our nation. So it is in this way, that refining our ability to lead throughout all situations is a matter of national security.

References
Airman leadership distance learning course: Course foundation (9th ed.). (2017). Maxwell-Gunter Air Force Base, AL: Air University. Retrieved September 23, 2017 from https://goo.gl/n2CN9F
Blanchard Research and Training India LLP (Producer). (2014, September 11). Ken & Scott Blanchard – Situational leadership II [Video file]. Retrieved September 23, 2017 from https://goo.gl/kMVsjW
Northouse, P. G. (2016). Leadership: theory and practice (7th ed.). Los Angeles: SAGE Publications.
Pennsylvania State University World Campus (2017). PSYCH 485 Lesson 5: Style and situational approaches. Retrieved September 23, 2017 from https://goo.gl/SNZRqA
The Airman Handbook. (2015). Washington, D.C.: Department of the Air Force. Retrieved September 23, 2017 from https://goo.gl/qLZ6ec

Skip to toolbar