leader

Leadership is Being a Mentor

June 22, 2014 by adr5316

Having the right leadership in your life is powerful beyond measure and can greatly impact your own success not only professionally but personally. Our text defines leadership as “A process whereby an individual influences a group of individuals to achieve a common goal.”(Northouse, 2013) I agree and disagree with the text books definition of leadership. The main cause of my disagreement is because I feel leadership is much more personal then simply getting people to do a common goal or in most cases do the job that they are paid for. I believe the text books definition would fit a manager more so than a leader. I believe that a leader not only inspires his followers to perform what is expected of them in a highly proficient manner, but also helps them grow as a person by providing mentor-ship when it is needed. I can attest to this being an accurate depiction of a leader because I am an active duty Marine Staff Sergeant and over the past 8 years I have experienced numerous leaders with different styles, but the ones who provided mentor-ship to me are the only ones I as a follower valued.

Figure 1. Robert Dunning 2014

The above image is a photo of the first true leader I had come across in my Marine Corps career. This is Master Sergeant Robert Dunning (retired this month). Robert was the assigned leader of the first work center I entered and possessed expert power regarding everything and anything Marine Corps related. This is to be expected from a Staff Non-Commissioned Officer (SNCO) who has been performing his duties for well over a decade, but what was surprising to me was how concerned he was that I knew not only my job, but that I had the necessary tools to thrive in the game of life. Robert taught me basically how to be a man, you see I do have a father; however, he has a mental disorder and wasn’t there to provide the right kind of guidance a young man needs growing up to transform him from a boy to a man. I learned many things from Robert, from having accountability of ones own actions to understanding the stock market and the importance of investing now to be able to provide for my family in the future. It wasn’t easy for Robert, I was pretty thick headed and closed minded after all I was 19 years old and receiving a steady paycheck for the first time. So who is this guy telling me where to spend the money I earned from working a 60 hour week. Robert got further involved in my development and that meant my personal life and forced me to enroll in college (It was that or we were going to work later) I eventually thought I’d get one over on him and dropped the courses… it was not a good day when he found out. But thankfully, Robert had the determination and vision to give me the medicine I so desperately needed. In fact he is an enormous influence on me transferring to Penn State and finishing a degree.

I believe leaders have the ability to make leaders. A leader grooms their replacement because they understand legacy and have the self-confidence to pass on the knowledge they possess. Unlike the trait perspective suggests, which kinda suggested that leaders are born with certain traits that cause their impact. I agree with the text that implies that leadership can be learned, for example if you are lead by someone that possesses the necessary traits to display leadership shouldn’t you start to mimic them out of human nature? I remember an old saying that states “You become the company you keep.” I know I’ve taken my share of “leadership tools” for my “leadership tool box” and by doing so have become over time a better leader.

I tend to agree with the text that there are certain qualities that make up a good leader and one of the negatives of this is that there hasn’t been a definitive list provided yet; however, I am convinced that the Marine Corps 14 leadership traits are all that a leader needs. The acronym JJ DID TIE BUCKLE serves Marines as a reminder of what we should strive for.

Justice, Judgment, Dependability, Initiative, Decisiveness, Tact, Integrity, Enthusiasm, Bearing, Unselfishness, Courage, Knowledge, Loyalty and Endurance.

(JJ DID TIE BUCKLE)

I believe that a leader that is armed with a good mentor and the Marine Corps leadership traits possesses unlimited potential for excellence. But I also believe a leader needs to have an open mind so I am welcome to further learning what I can in this class so I can give a better product to those that I lead. Below is a photo of a benchmark on my leadership journey its of my family and I on the day I was promoted to to Staff Sergeant. (June 1, 2014) Notice The leadership principles on the wall !

Figure 2. Promotion to Staff Sergeant

References

Northouse, P.G. (2013). Leadership: Theory and Practice. Los Angeles: Sage Publications.

Toy Story’s Woody: Toys Unite!

April 21, 2014 by Alicia McCormick

The Disney Pixar movie, Toy Story, is loved by young and old alike. This is the reason the beloved characters and story were continued through two subsequent movies, Toy Story 2 and Toy Story 3, making it a trilogy of behavior to evaluate (and enjoy!). The characters in the movie span personality characteristics across many dimensions allowing the audience to relate to all the characters. The group of toys owned by Andy is a small, well-constructed work group in which Woody the cowboy is the leader. Woody’s leadership can be assessed through the “Leadership Grid”, developed by Blake and Mouton (1985) (Northouse, 2012) in reference to the skills approach. Woody employs a Team Management style when employing his leadership behaviors as compared to the Leadership Grid. Blake and Mouton (1985) state that most leaders have a dominant management style that they use most of the time; however they utilize a backup style in times under pressure (Northouse, 2012). Woody’s backup style lies with the Authority-compliance management spectrum.

The Skills Approach attempts to view leadership actions and behaviors. Two categories have arisen through both the Ohio State Studies in the late 1940s, based on studies by Stogdill (1948) and the University of Michigan Studies around the same time (Northouse, 2012). The most common developmental tool through this approach, the Leadership Grid, was created by Blake and Mouton in 1964 and has been revised several times (Northouse, 2012). The two categories according to the Leadership Grid by Blake and Mouton (1985) are concern for production and concern for people. These categories reflect initiating structure and consideration, coined by Stogdill (1974), and employee orientation and production orientation labeled by the University of Michigan studies (Northouse, 2012). Concern for production is attributed to issues such as attention to policy decisions, workload, and process issues (Northouse, 2012). In essence the concern for production behavior category is what the leadership behavior is seeking to accomplish. Concern for people contains such behavior as promoting positive social relations, good working conditions, and building organizational commitment and trust (Northouse, 2012).

Retrieved from: http://clouducation.wordpress.com/2012/03/07/5-educational-leadership-realities/

Woody is in the leadership position of the group of toys. His behavior is illustrated throughout all 3 of the movies. His style is reflective in Team Management on the Leadership Grid. Team Management leader behavior is seen as: “stimulates participation, acts determined, gets issues into the open, makes priorities clear, follows through, behaves open-mindedly, and enjoys working”(Northouse, 2012, p. 81). His leadership behaviors are committed to doing what will keep the toys safe and being available for their owner Andy when he needs them. Woody engages the toys in weekly meetings to keep all the toys committed and informed, to educate on safety and protocol, or as needed when a problem arises. During meetings the toys are encouraged to participate and share ideas with the group. In the original movie, when Andy is having a birthday party, the toys are congregated together to receive the information of which new toys Andy receives so that the toys are prepared for whatever comes their way. Woody continually supports the other toys by reaffirming their place in Andy’s room. No matter what Andy receives they will deal with it together and no one is being thrown away, a large fear among toys. The process by which they find out what Andy receives for his birthday is well constructed and orchestrated by Woody, showing his concern for production. The army guys are deployed orderly to obtain the information and Woody has the toys in Andy’s room gathered to hear the news. Woody knows what is needed to accomplish the goals that are set.

In Toy Story 3, Woody is concerned for the well-being of not only the toys but Andy as well. Although Andy has grown, Woody is committed to being available if he should ever need him or the other toys. Woody continually acts determined to this end and gets issues out into the open. Both the meetings and ultimate goal commitment are demonstrative of Team Management from the Leadership Grid (Northouse, 2012). Woody stimulates the group to share their ideas and thoughts so that they may stay together. The group’s thoughts are important to Woody as the leader and although he does not always agree with the group, he is continually open-minded in receiving their thoughts and ideas. The toys have also discussed what they have learned at such meetings as “Rust Prevention” and “Battery Safety” throughout the trilogy, illustrating Woody’s continual policy development and education to the group. His persistence to keep the group safe and committed through his openness to ideas, his stimulation of participation from the group, his determination, and making the priorities clear show his Team Management style of leadership.

Through the skills approach Leadership Grid, Blake and Mouton (1985) said that most leaders have a dominant style and at times, use a backup style (Northouse, 2012). There are times where Woody feels that the group is jeopardizing their safety and in these moments, while under pressure, employs his backup style. Woody tends to shift his style to the Authority-Compliance Management style as a backup. In this type of leadership style the leader is seen as controlling and demanding (Northouse, 2012). These situations tend to arise in the movies in several capacities. In Toy Story 3, Woody feels as though they should stay with Andy but the group does not want to be stored away and never played with so they feel they should move on. Woody attempts to assert his authority by demanding the group stay with Andy. When under pressure, Blake and Mouton (1985) state that the leader will resort to their backup style (Northouse, 2012). Woody only resorts to this type of behavior when he feels the group is making the wrong decision and feels pressured to do so as though he has no other option to change their minds.

Woody and the gang from Toy Story exhibit the leader and subordinate relationship that resembles Team Management Style from the Leadership Grid developed by Blake and Mouton (1985) (Northouse, 2012). As discussed, Woody only deploys his backup style when under pressure. The safety and commitment of the toys to Andy is fostered in a positive environment by Woody in order to preserve the group’s emotional needs and well-being. Woody displays more commitment to the overall goals and group than most leaders we see today.

References

Northouse, Peter G. (2013). Leadership: Theory and Practice. Sixth Edition. Sage Publications.

Transformationally Disguised: A Wolf in Sheep’s Clothes (on Wall Street)

April 11, 2014 by Alicia McCormick

In the Martin Scorsese movie, The Wolf on Wall Street, Leonardo DiCaprio’s character Jordan Belfort (Paramount Pictures, 2013) exhibits characteristics consistent with transformational leadership, however his unmoral behavior, self-interested, and exploitive tendencies push his leadership to the pseudotransformational category. Jordan Belfort begins in a low-level position at a Wall Street Firm but then becomes unemployed. Jordan, with convincing from his wife, decides to take a position with a penny stock firm in Long Island. From there, Belfort takes his aggressive, visionary style, never settle attitude and begins his own company. Belfort possesses the ability to influence and elevate the emotional levels of people therefore he is able to create a monster business that transforms the lives of many people, producing millions in revenue. In the movie, Jordan Belfort says, “I was born with a gift to persuade people, to lead” (Paramount Pictures, 2013). His employees are devout and follow him through any and everything to develop the picture he paints. Jordan is able to build trust by conveying his image of self-confidence and personal example. Jordan Belfort is able to create personalized leadership through personal bonds with his followers by applying empathy at the social cues they exhibit in their emotional state. His employees are inspired and excited by Jordan, leading to increases in productivity and effort (PSU WC, L. 10, p. 4). The employees look to Jordan for answers, on how to run their daily business with clients. They do not think for themselves, they believe and rely on Jordan to lead them to their vision. Belfort’s ethics, morality, and ultimate arrest prove the shift from authentic transformational leadership to pseudotransformational leadership. Although many characteristics are mirrored, the main objective of transformational leaders is socialized, moral uplifting (Northouse, 2013) whereas the psuedotransformational leader has warped values and is self-consumed (Northouse, 2013). Taking his vision, his inspiration to followers, and the relationships he builds with trust and self-confidence we can view Jordan Belfort as an example of transformational leaders turn pseudotransformational (PSU WC, L. 10, p. 4). Belfort is able to transform a mix-matched, low potential group of men and women into a killer brand on Wall Street.

Jordan Belfort was a man that saw a larger picture of wealth on Wall Street and wanted a piece for himself. The lesson commentary states “…transformational leaders are future-oriented. They recognize the problems of a present system and offer a vision to overcome these problems” (PSU WC, L. 10, p. 4). The vision that Jordan Belfort had included wealth, prestige, and status through his own stock brokerage company. He had the ability to share his vision with such passion and drive. His vision, he knew, needed more than just him to achieve his goal of wealth therefore looked to others to join his vision. Belfort had immense self-confidence and led by personal example, building the image and trust of his followers, displayed by followers of transformational leaders (PSU WC, L. 10, p. 4). Though Belfort was not known to have any moral conviction or show any sort of personal sacrifice, he moved his followers with his actions, never doubting himself and his own personal goals. He also was sure to create an atmosphere in which he didn’t ever need to make personal sacrifices, though displaying the image that he would. His own personal goal of wealth came first however he displayed to his employees that their happiness and well-being came first.

His motivation to those that worked for him is a prime characteristic of transformational leaders. Jordan’s ability to excite people was his main motivational piece. By persuading friends and his parents to join his business venture, he was able to make his vision a reality. His influence was felt emotionally by the ones who joined with him. Transformational leaders have personalized leadership, they pick up on followers’ social cues and emotional states therefore share strong, personal bonds with them (Hughes, Ginnett, & Curphy, 2012, as referenced in PSU WC, L. 10, p. 3). In Jordan’s case however, he used their strong relationships to gain personally while they also benefited. The emotion he elicited from people is another prime factor in his ability to achieve his vision. One of the first meetings where Jordan shares his vision is in a dusty old warehouse. He is talking to a group of friends, his excitement and anticipation can be felt with his upcoming venture. It does not take him but a few sentences to gain strong commitment and devotion of all the men to join as stockbrokers with his new company, “Stratton Oakmont”. The first employees in this meeting are drawn to Jordan’s vision, excited and willing to do whatever Jordan tells them is best, displaying follower characteristics of transformational leadership (PSU WC, L. 10, p. 4). Another scene in which Jordan exhibits his ability to excite is at a party with the entire office and many party guests. The firm is hosting a party in the early days of their success; Belfort grabs the microphone and tells the crowd how wonderful it is to be them, to be a part of their company. It is not merely that he says the words; he moves his entire being and is able to command the crowd to cheer and beg for more. The emotions involved with his leadership are again pronounced in this moment. Jordan possesses strong rhetorical skills, he has strong ability to “heighten followers’ emotional levels and inspire them to embrace the vision” (PSU WC, L. 10, p. 4). Jordan Belfort’s employees expect more of themselves because Jordan does as well.

The truth is that Jordan Belfort possessed no moral conviction or the need to make personal sacrifice, he exhibits strong characteristics that exude and produce transformation, however without the moral conviction his leadership is now categorized as transformational leadership because of the negative characteristics (Northouse, 2013). His leadership is saturated with vision and the ability to connect the vision emotionally with his followers. In turn, his employees adore Jordan and do whatever he tells them to do regarding the business. They grow their firm into heights of wealth that none of them ever imagined. Jordan Belfort had characteristics that made him into a transformational leader. The defining characteristic for transformational leadership is moral uplifting (Northouse, 2013). On this level Jordan Belfort now becomes a pseudotransformational leader, corrupting one stockbroker at a time.

References

Northouse, Peter G. (2013). Leadership: Theory and Practice. Sixth Edition. Sage Publications.

Paramount Pictures. (2013). The Wolf on Wall Street. Retrieved from http://www.thewolfofwallstreet.com/

The Pennsylvania State University. (2013). PSYCH 484: Leadership in Work Settings Lesson 10: Transformational Leadership. Retrieved from https://courses.worldcampus.psu.edu/sp14/psych485/002/content/10_lesson/printlesson.html

Parenting: Servant Leadership, No Doubt!

April 6, 2014 by Alicia McCormick

Being a parent is one of the simplest ways to illustrate servant leadership. As a parent, putting my children first, helping them to grow, and prosper is at the forefront of my leadership style. A parent’s way of leading their child through life varies, just as leadership in an organization varies. My house IS my organization. I joke that I am the CFO while my husband retains CEO status. This organization (my home) is run with more elements of servant leadership than any other leadership style. Raising my children, my own desires have not just been pushed aside but I am happy and desire it to be this way. My goal and mission in this crazy thing they call parenthood is that at the end of my children’s adolescence, they will be ready, willing, and able to carry on as independent adults that are productive parts of society. By choosing servant leadership as the catalyst to my parenting, the context and culture in our home (organization), my attributes as the parent (leader), and my children’s (follower’s) receptivity all play a role in the success we share together. The behaviors I display as a servant leader produce outcomes today and will produce outcomes in my children’s lives down the road.
Servant leaders place their followers first, empower them, and help to develop them to their fullest potential. Robert Greenleaf (1970) developed the theory of servant leadership. Others, including Graham (1991), Spears (2002), Russell and Stone (2002), and Patterson (2003), have further developed the theory. Spears (2002) sorted Greenleaf’s writings and produced a list of 10 characteristics that characterize servant leaders. They are: Listening, Empathy, Healing, awareness, persuasion, conceptualization, foresight, stewardship, commitment to the growth of people, building community (Northouse, 2013). Russell and Stone (2002) produced a model of servant leadership that displays attributes, functional characteristics, and accompanying characteristics (Northouse, 2013). Patterson (2003) developed a model based on values that specify building blocks for the ethical behavior displayed by servant leaders (Northouse, 2013). Another model is based on Liden, Wayne, Zhao, and Henderson (2008) that makes use of three factors (Northouse, 2013). This model shows antecedent conditions, servant behaviors, and leadership outcomes in an effort to make sense of the intensely complex theory of servant leadership (Northouse, 2013).
The behaviors in the model of servant leadership can be seen when evaluating my leadership as a parent. The conceptualization I possess for my children is a future as ready, willing, and productive adults. For emotional healing, who is the first person many people want when they need a shoulder to lean on or cry on? Correct. Their mom. There is never a time that I am not available when my children need someone. In order to help my children grow and succeed, I spend at least an hour each day reading, writing, and practicing other skills they are developing in school. Their participation in after school activities is also important. Development in social areas of their lives and commitment to other organizations foster community ties. Teaching my children to use manners and do “the right thing in the right way” (Northouse, 2013, p. 229) is an ongoing process and behavior practice that I value highly. In order for my children to behave in a way that will be productive and respectful in the future, I aim to continually perform acts of kindness and make rational decisions based on the truth even if the truth is hard to deal with instead of taking the easy way or making decisions based on emotions. Within my home, many decisions are made as a family. I feel that with my children participating in decisions, large and small, they have a sense of control to their lives. Realistically, they do not have complete control, they are only children. However, by asking their opinions and eliciting conversations among us, their sense of unity with the family is heightened and continuing to develop. The culture in our home is conducive to their growth. The goal is for their adult selves to perform contributing acts as respectable adults in the community.
The 10 characteristics compiled from Greenleaf’s writings by Spears (2002) blend with the leader behaviors found in Liden, et al (2008)’s model. These characteristics, listening, empathy, healing, awareness, persuasion, conceptualization, foresight, stewardship, commitment to the growth of people, and building community, further compound to demonstrate the pure devotion servant leaders have to their followers. In my case, each day of my life is spent in the commitment to my children, serving to develop their growth in a positive way.
The outcome of my parenting, my servant leadership, varies from day to day. My children are growing into young adults before my eyes. In moments I am aware of the way this organization (my home) is the breeding ground. As I watch my daughter make homemade cards and decorate Easter eggs for the elderly across the street. As I see my son go out of his way to help another boy clean up a spilled bottle of water, while other children simply walk by, makes me see the goal of developing them into decent people is being realized, little by little.
While being a parent, the servant leadership behaviors I display cover the models presented. Combining the culture and context of my home with my behaviors as a parent, leads to outcomes consistent with the servant leadership models. Servant leadership as applied to parenting was never a question to me. As a parent, many things are uncertain. However, the commitment I have to their upbringing, the positive influence I choose to pursue for their benefit is never a question. I am a servant to their lives, for now and always.

References
Northouse, Peter G. (2013). Leadership: Theory and Practice. Sixth Edition. Sage Publications

Competency and Commitment: Power in Management vs Leadership

February 28, 2014 by Susan Hicks

By: Susan Hicks

I think that we have all worked under those management types that have authority over their followers to get tasks completed efficiently and accurately. They have competent followers who perform the tasks assigned to them because the ‘leader’ had the authority to assign these tasks with an exercise of power. This power is the capacity or potential to influence others which has an effect on another’s attitudes, beliefs or behaviors (PSU, 2014). There is a difference between those followers who exude competency and with those with competency and commitment. Additionally, there is a difference in power wielded by managers versus leaders. For the managers who strive to the role of having the power to assign tasks to followers and take great pride in the belief that they can lead a group, are those followers performing the competent tasks that stem from the power of an authority – manager type figure, or are they the competent, committed followers who are willing to go beyond basic direction to finish the task without constant direction or guidance. Can a manager influence these individuals to competently complete a task while influencing these individuals to be committed to the task as well?

Management – Personalized Power

Wielding power over followers from management perspective that exerts authoritative power with rewards or punishment, cannot necessarily make one committed. Utilizing legitimate power- formal authority assigned by the organization (PSU, 2013) to stand over a group of followers like an employment judge and jury that under their own personalized power, mandates individuals to obey or be punished may sound somewhat extreme, however, there are management individuals who see leadership as this almighty power force that automatically gives them the potential to influence. Influence is the effect of change in the follower’s “attitudes, values, beliefs, or behaviors” as a result of the power exerted on the individual by the leader/manager (PSU, 2013).This potential to influence followers in the ‘do as I say’ power struggle of threats and promises of resources (employment) that can be given (employment retention) or taken away (employment termination) for non-compliance can cause resentment in followers as they comply with the task assignment but do not personally or individually commit (Folger, Poole, & Stutman, 2009). These followers are managed through the motions of the task but are not lead to commitment of the task. There are those individuals who can by mere heartfelt commitment to the organization, read their manager’s intent and make small decisions that can influence the outcome of the task assignment without bringing every little iota of discrepancy in problem resolution to the attention of the task assigner. These followers also have power that may not be seen from the manager’s perspective. Whereas some followers may identify commitment to the organization under the manager’s watchful eye, however, these followers’ commitment is objectified on the task and based solely on fear, Therefore, we can’t lose sight of the committed employee who goes above and beyond mandated direction to achieve goals for the organization who does so under leadership direction, not under management directive. To achieve this, managers must understand that they are not the only one with power in the relationship of leader and follower.

Leadership – Socialized power

There is also a power in leadership that is different from our management power example. Leadership defined as “a process whereby an individual influences a group of individuals to achieve a common goal” and does not sound all that different from what a manager attempts to achieve (Northouse, 2013). However, let us take this one step further to acknowledge that albeit the manager possesses legitimate power, the leader possesses a personal socialized power that is “derived from being seen by followers as likable and knowledgeable” (Northouse, 2013). It was identified as being a referent power from “The Bases of Social Power” in the Group Dynamics: Research and Theory of J.R French Jr, and B. Raven’s study in 1962 (Northouse, 2013). This study recognized that the ability to influence stemmed from the individual’s power base from either Referent – identification and likeability, Expert – perceptions of competence, Legitimate – as we mentioned above in assigned formal authority, – Reward – capacity to provide awards (such as in keeping employment), and Coercion – capacity to discipline (as in employment termination) (Northouse, 2013). In the relationship of leader to follower, we must acknowledge that to ascertain this power, it is deemed by the follower in the fluidity of the interaction between leaders and followers in a power teeter totter that allows followers to identify with the leader, the goal, and their own interpersonal importance in the completion of the task. This allows the commitment of the followers to interject personal achievement and subject objectification with the leader in accurate and efficient task completion not seen with the managed individual. Leaders can elicit from their followers a willingness, perceived enjoyment, and satisfaction to enhance the organization as they share power resources in the give and take exchange that is not judged under the watchful scrutiny of power rewards or punishment. The reward or punishment for the committed followers is self-based in their sole judgment of the levels of commitment and their effort to strive toward competency in completing the task. Committed and competent followers also form committed alliances with team goals instead of maintaining an individual goal under fear of resource seizure or elimination.

It is possible for the manager to elicit commitment in addition to competency from their followers as long as they understand the relational power give and take teeter totter that occurs in situations under their guidance. Followers also maintain power that is given to the leader in acceptance of their likeability (Referent Power), their knowledge (Expert Power), respect for their formal authority (Legitimate Power), and their ability to identify with the perceived capacity to assign rewards/punishment (Reward or Coercive Power). While managers strive to influence change in their followers by direction, they must also accept that followers maintain power to allow that change (in the identification of commitment) to occur. Therefore influence as a degree of actual change is smaller with those individuals who change the follower less by only effecting competency rather than competency and commitment (PSU, 2013).

References:

Folger, J.P., Poole, M.S., & Stutman, R.K. (2009). Working Through Conflict: Strategies for Relationships, Groups, and Organizations. (4^th ed.). Belmont: Wadsworth Publishing.

Northouse, P.G. (2013). Leadership: Theory and Practice. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.

Pennsylvania State University. (2014). PSYCH 485 Lesson 7: Power and Influence. Retrieved February 27, 2014 from https://courses.worldcampus.psu.edu/sp14/psych485/001/content/07_lesson/03_page.html