Leadership

PSYCH 485 blog

Mahatma Gandhi: A Visionary Leader

by

In a world where effective leadership is essential for growth and progress, understanding the significance of strong leadership skills is crucial. For instance, Mahatma Gandhi led India in its struggle for independence from British rule in 1947 with the ability to inspire, motivate, and guide individuals towards achieving common goals. His nonviolent civil disobedience advocacy and mobilization of the Indian population against British colonialism were among the reasons Gandhi was considered a great leader. His legacy reminds us of the importance of strong leadership and its impact on society (History.com Editors, 2010).

Just as in 1947, today’s rapidly changing world and various organizations still require innovative leadership to succeed. Leadership must not only inspire and motivate, but also possess a stark understanding of emotional intelligence, communication, and diversity. Ideally, a good leader should be similar to Gandhi in their ability to empathize with his or her team members’ concerns and ideas, listen to alternative viewpoints, and make decisions that are in the organization’s best interest. Gandhi was a visionary, dedicated to using nonviolent resistance to create a more equal and inclusive society. As a leader, he was able to inspire, empower, and bring about lasting change.

Exploration of leadership innovation includes examining great leaders like Gandhi, and also investigating the Five Factor Model (Northouse, 2021), which explains how to be a dynamic and effective leader by researching motivation, emotional intelligence, and communication. Understanding these models can help assess personality traits such as extraversion, conscientiousness, and openness. It can help better realize the motivations of those being lead and how to communicate with them effectively. When it comes to leading others, Gandhi once said, “You must be the change you wish to see in the world” (Bansal, 2016).

The act of leadership goes beyond a title or a position; it involves a mindset and a set of qualities that enable individuals to influence and inspire others. In addition to understanding one’s strengths and weaknesses, a leader must be able to adapt to changes in circumstances. Communication skills are excellent, and empathic connections are essential to teamwork. It is important to motivate and empower team members, take responsibility for their actions, and make complex decisions. A leader should also be able to function as a good role model and solve problems efficiently. Gandhi exemplified all these qualities. In addition to having a profound understanding of himself and other people, he was able to motivate and empower his team. He was also an excellent communicator, showed empathy, had problem-solving abilities and a keen sense of responsibility.

According to Northouse (2021) in Trait approach, a leader with high emotional intelligence may be able to recognize when a team member needs a break or additional assistance, leading to a more productive work environment. Leaders can use emotional intelligence to create a sense of trust and respect by being able to perceive, understand, and manage emotions (Northouse, 2021). Using emotional intelligence to motivate their team and help them achieve their goals is also an effective way for leaders to resolve conflicts. Gandhi is a fitting example of a leader who possessed such emotional intelligence. As well as understanding and managing his own emotions, he could also manage the emotions of others. He demonstrated his emotional intelligence by promoting nonviolence and fostering unity among people from various backgrounds and religions.

Effective leadership also depends on the followers’ active listening, commitment to the leader’s vision, and constructive feedback. As Gandhi once said, “A leader is nothing without exceptional followers” (Pitale-Puradkar). Gandhi emphasized the importance of followers in inspiring and propelling leaders to greatness through this quote. For leaders and followers to have a mutually beneficial relationship, they must build on trust, cooperation, and goals. Leading by example and encouraging others to improve encourages personal and professional development. They also inspire a positive culture of collaboration and leadership in the organization through their collective efforts. Gandhi said, “The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way its animals are treated” (Bansal, 2016). This sentiment also applies to the relationship between leaders and followers. In addition to their unwavering loyalty, dependable nature, and hard work ethic, they cultivate an environment conducive to the growth and advancement of outstanding leaders by working together.

The world can become a better place by embodying a successful leader’s qualities and nurturing others’ potential while having exceptional followers who are an invaluable asset. In addition to providing leaders with continuous and unconditional support, commitment, and constructive feedback, their efforts enable them to reach their greatest potential, establishing changes within organizations and inspiring others to succeed as well. Gandhi’s concept of leadership was rooted in truth, nonviolence, and service. Such exemplary leadership can bring immense improvement in society, both within organizations and communities at large. Gandhi believed that everyone can be a leader, and that his actions can create a ripple effect of positive change in the world. He strived to inspire others and was unwavering in his commitment to these values.

References

Acharya, N. (2019). Mahatma Gandhi At 150: Lessons On Leadership. Retrieved 2023, from Forbes.com: https://www.forbes.com/sites/nishacharya/2019/10/02/mahatma-gandhi-at-150-lessons-on-leadership/?sh=21d0c574d7c1

Akbarsha, M. A. (2010). Mahatma Gandhi–Doerenkamp Center for Alternatives to Use of Animals in Life Science Education. Journal of Pharmacology & Pharmacotherapeutics, 1(2), 108-110. doi:https://doi.org/10.4103/0976-500X.72353

Bansal, I. &. (2016). Mapping Emotional Competencies of Mahatma Gandhi: A Biographical Analysis Approach. Journal of Human Values, 19(2), 133-145. doi:https://doi.org/10.1177/097168581349226

History.com Editors. (2010). Mahatma Gandhi. Retrieved from HISTORY: https://www.history.com/topics/asian-history/mahatma-gandhi

Northouse, P. G. (2021). Leadership: Theory and Practice (9th ed.). US: SAGE Publications, Inc. Retrieved from https://bookshelf.vitalsource.com/books/9781071834473

Pitale-Puradkar, P. R. (n.d.). Gandhi – Leader of Millenniums. Gandhian Institutions. Retrieved from mkgandhi.org: https://www.mkgandhi.org/articles/gandhi-leader-of-millenniums.html#:~:text=Gandhian%20ideology%20is%20rooted%20in,Gita%2C%20the%20Buddha%20and%20Christ.

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.

The Independent Contractor Role in LMX Theory

by

Until the last two years, I have held a traditional role as a direct employee to a company. After transitioning into an independent contractor role, I discovered that many benefits were being rewarded to employees that independent contractors were missing out on, most importantly the benefits from strong leadership. It seems that a huge gap exists in the interactions occurring between leaders and employees versus those between leaders and independent contractors. Much of these interactions, when further examined under the Leader-Member Exchange (LMX) theory, explain why such disconnected leader-follower relationships involving independent contractors continue to survive in corporate environments and are reinforced by the cultures developed from an antiquated view of leadership (e.g., trait approach) (Northouse, 2019). Fortunately, leaders can curb this type of dismissive mindset towards independent contractors. To achieve this, leaders must understand the types of groups (or dyads) residing in their work environments (Northouse, 2019), the effects that come from developing “high- and low-quality LMX relationships” (Northouse, 2019), and the LMX theory principles available to apply in the interactions occurring with independent contractors (Northouse, 2019).

Before describing and analyzing how leaders can strengthen a leadership process that involves independent contractors as followers, the LMX theory approach must first be explained. Northouse (2019) noted that the LMX theory focuses on the engagement process that a leader and follower establish. This means that the relationship that both the leader and follower decide to commit to will determine the strength of the leadership process (Northouse, 2019). Whereas other leadership theories focus on either the leader, follower, or situation in the leadership process, the LMX theory emphasizes the leader’s and follower’s chemistry (Northouse, 2019). With this fundamental knowledge, a leader can further examine the relationships they develop with followers, in this case, independent contractors.

LMX theory reveals that there are two different types of groups that form in an organizational environment: the “in-group” and the “out-group” (Northouse, 2019). The distinctions between these groups are not subtle (Northouse, 2019). The in-group will consist of followers considered to be the leader’s closest confidants (Northouse, 2019). This exclusive group will go above and beyond for the leader, winning their leader’s favor and approval (Northouse, 2019). In contrast, the out-group is considered to be a crew of outcasts when compared to the in-group. These individuals are meant to fulfill one purpose: to complete the task requirement they were appointed for (Northouse, 2019). Services performed by the out-group do not receive recognition or adulation but confirmation. Therefore, the out-group and leader merely participate in a transaction (Northouse, 2019). In other words, the follower provides a service, and the leader acknowledges that the work was completed and approves the compensation that is to be distributed to the follower.

This interaction between a leader and the out-group is a perfect example of how leaders interact with independent contractors. Independent contractors are contracted to provide a specific set of services and nothing else. Since independent contractors either work for themselves or a different company, corporate cultures have limited their scope and resources to only what is required to complete the task they are hired for (Northouse, 2019). Anything outside their work contract is irrelevant. That means any opportunity for professional growth is inaccessible to them, mentoring by a leader is non-existent, and communication is concentrated solely on the job requirements (Northouse, 2019). As a result, these constraints affect the quality of relationships developed between these leaders and independent contractors (Northouse, 2019).

According to the LMX theory, there are two types of quality LMX relationships: high-quality and low-quality (Northouse, 2019). The high-quality LMX relationship is most common in the exchanges between leaders and in-groups (Northouse, 2019). These LMX relationships lead to much more enriched work environments where followers thrive and effectively accomplish their goals (Northouse, 2019). Likewise, leaders demonstrate strong leadership due to their followers’ motivation and dedication to the harmonious relationship developed between them (Northouse, 2019). On the opposite end of the LMX relationship spectrum are low-quality LMX relationships. These types of relationships disclose the incompatibility between leaders and followers (Northouse, 2019). As researchers Harris, Wheeler, and Kacmar discovered, low-quality LMX relationships espouse mistrust, disengagement, and reticence (as cited in Northouse, 2019). Thus, out-groups will experience these types of LMX relationships the most since their only objective is to complete work based on their job roles’ expectations. Any benefits outside of these expectations are not offered to out-groups, which discourages any opportunity of strengthening the exchanges between leaders and followers as they are unnecessary.

Low-quality LMX relationships are common between leaders and independent contractors hired to work on specific projects. Since the contract is temporary or short-lived, a leader will scrutinize each phase of the project to ensure that the independent contractor is fulfilling the objectives. This is indicative of the lack of trust that exists within the low-quality LMX relationships (Northouse, 2019). One would think that this thorough examination into a project would lead to a persistent engagement between independent contractors and leaders. However, leaders will generally withdraw from providing further direction on a project and follow up only for a status update when working with independent contractors. Because independent contractors are considered the subject matter experts on the assigned tasks, leaders also forgo collaborating with independent contractors. Regardless, this type of low-quality LMX relationship hampers the overall effectiveness of the leadership process between leaders and independent contractors.

As Northouse (2019) pointed out, the LMX theory provides areas of opportunity for leaders to analyze their interactions with followers and make appropriate adjustments in order to improve these relationships. Since independent contractors align closer to the low-quality LMX relationships that exist with out-groups, the following suggestions can help reform these types of interactions that are prevalent between leaders and independent contractors.

Leaders must understand that an organization’s restrictions on providing tangible benefits (e.g., insurance benefits, time off, company discounts, employee stock) does not mean that leaders are restricted from providing intangible benefits (e.g., positive work environment, job satisfaction, career growth advice). LMX theory teaches that positive outcomes follow strong collaborations between leaders and followers (Northouse, 2019). So, leaders should seek to increase their interactions with independent contractors and determine the best way to supply those intangible benefits. Satisfying this desire or need (which I have personally experienced) can set a solid ground for developing strong partnerships, which benefits the leader, independent contractor, and the organization as a whole (Northouse, 2019). Additionally, these partnerships help counter the shortcomings of low-quality LMX relationships and transform them into high-quality LMX relationships (Northouse, 2019). Above all, the most important element that must not go unnoticed in the LMX theory is communication (Northouse, 2019). Every interaction or engaged process requires some form of communication between leaders and followers (Northouse, 2019). Therefore, leaders should always make an effort to keep an open line of communication with independent contractors, as this benefits all those involved in the leadership process working towards a goal. As Northouse (2019) stated, strong communication develops the most effective interactions between leaders and followers.

The LMX theory provides guidance for strengthening the interactions between leaders and independent contractors by recognizing the types of groups and relationships present in a work environment (Northouse, 2019). High-quality LMX relationships are generally found in the interactions between leaders and in-groups (Northouse, 2019). Meanwhile, low-quality LMX relationships are experienced by leaders and out-groups, resulting in minimal interactions that leave much to be desired in the leadership process that involve followers such as independent contractors. It is up to leaders to establish strong communication levels with independent contractors, so they feel valued and accepted as part of the organizational team (Northouse, 2019). Maintaining an open communication line and establishing an environment of collaboration are a few ways to turn these low-quality LMX relationships into high-quality LMX relationships. Lack of employing these suggestions from the LMX theory will only result in stunted productivity and poor progress towards organizational goals. Thus, a positive level of engagement provides an incentive for the independent contractor to put their best effort into their work to produce top results for the leader and organization (Northouse, 2019), providing a win-win situation for all participating individuals in the leadership process.

Reference:

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

Leader or Follower: Who is Really in Control of this Relationship?

by

Reflecting on Northouse’s “Followership” chapter, I feel that I have suddenly been slapped in the face with a revelation: the power and control we thought to be managed by a leader has actually been governed by the follower all along. As I try to make sense of this new realization, I am quickly reminded of Sally Field’s iconic Mrs. Doubtfire dinner scene where she responds to a surprising discovery with the following: “the whole time? The whole time, you were – THE WHOLE TIME?!” (Columbus, 1993). Northouse (2019) noted that we are groomed to believe that leadership requires specific skills and qualities either innately within us or capable of being developed during our childhoods. This type of upbringing rings true, especially in my personal life. I cannot remember a moment from my upbringing where the spotlight was removed away from the characteristics of a leader and placed on the typology of the individuals allowing the leader to guide, direct, and influence them.

Could it be true that followers have always possessed the power to regulate the role a leader plays in their lives? Based on the trait approach, one may surmise that the skills and qualities of a leader not only affect but dictate how followers will respond to a leader’s directive. This concept seems to imply that a leader will ultimately determine and establish the types of relationships, boundaries, and behaviors complied with by their followers (Northouse, 2019). However, Northouse pointed out that even if a leader measures up to their role, checking off every leadership quality considered most prominent based on the trait approach, these leadership qualities’ values diminish if weak interactions exist with their followers. As a result, this has now created a shift in the role of leadership.

A leader’s role is not primarily dependent on the personalities, characteristics, or qualities of the individual occupying the leader role; it is contingent on whether the followers permit them even to lead. This approach of “reversing the lens” has now empowered followers to effect change in their leadership (Northouse, 2019). The shaping of a leader not only rests on those personality traits they were born with but on the traits and qualities followers expect them to develop and exhibit. Surprisingly, it seems there is now a swapping of roles; leaders find themselves responding to their followers by adapting to their followers’ expectations. Furthermore, this role exchange indicates that the power of influence is shared between the leader and the follower.

There is no question that leadership requires influence, which is the ability to persuade others to achieve a unified and desired outcome (Northouse, 2019). Although influence is ordinarily linked to a leader’s ability to persuade followers, extending that influential power to followers produces what Northouse referred to as “the leadership co-created process.” This process creates an environment where negotiations occur between the leader and the follower. The follower now has a voice at the table that forces both the leader and follower to recognize and accept their positions, which allows the follower to reject an individual’s position as a leader (Northouse, 2019). Unfortunately, this is not always the case, as followers tend to conform to various roles exuding behaviors that suppress the power of influence they potentially could have on their leaders.

Passive or ineffective followers can cause leadership to go unchecked and create a path for leaders to become toxic and pernicious. Without a proper challenge to their authority, leaders with bad intentions can become powerful, leading to coercion or intimidation tactics by leaders to exert their control. According to Northouse (2019), coercive leaders like Adolph Hitler, the Taliban, Jim Jones, and Rodrigo Duterte used threats and punishment to force followers to participate in harmful activities. The key to these types of leaders is how the power they exerted over their followers was tolerated. Northouse (2019) observed the different roles a follower can take on that might not feel the need to protest a leader’s decisions including, passive, conformist, resource, and bystander. These types of followers are usually withdrawn, apathetic, indifferent yes men, and ineffectual in maintaining a balanced relationship with their leaders. In order for a leader to be productive, they need the participation and engagement of their followers to guide them.

Effective leaders only exist when effective followers are present; therefore, it is imperative that followers uphold the types of roles that challenge their leaders (Northouse, 2019). As leaders have expectations of their followers, so should followers of their leaders. That means that followers need to exercise voicing their opinions and confronting any unethical practices performed by their leaders (Northouse, 2019). Leaders must be held accountable for their actions, and followers must understand that their active engagement with leaders will help govern and ensure this is maintained. Of course, this is easier said than done, but the reality is that followers have more influential power than they may think to urge leaders to live up to their own leadership roles. Therefore, control is no longer managed solely by leaders but is now a shared responsibility with followers.

Considering the contributions researchers have made to the study of the type of leader-follower relationship shared in the preceding paragraphs, this knowledge resonates with me on a personal level. As mentioned before, my upbringing was tailored around the office of leadership. The role of being an effective follower was never a priority. It was always about honing the skills and qualities, which aligned to Stogdill’s eight traits: (a) intelligence, (b) alertness, (c) insight, (d) responsibility, (e) initiative, (f) persistence, (g) self-confidence, and (h) sociability (Northouse, 2019). Additionally, I was taught to respect the office of leadership regardless of who held that role. This instruction meant that I was to do as I was told without question and be what leaders like to repeatedly refer to as a “team player.” This ingrained ideology is why I blindly followed managers without much dispute early in my career.

Unfortunately, there came a time in my career where this ideology shifted out of necessity. I found myself challenging a leader who was performing unethical practices with the company’s reporting. I was constantly questioning the type of retaliation I would face by exposing this act. It is in moments like these where morals are tested, and as Jean Lipman-Blumen claimed, there is a natural desire for security over the possibility of being outcasted (Northouse, 2019). Regardless, I knew that I had an obligation to do what was right, and I reported the issue, accepting any backlash coming my way. To my surprise, what I did was the start of an investigation that came with support from other followers. My willingness to come forward encouraged these followers to do the same. In the end, this leader was terminated. It seemed that I, as a follower, had more power than I initially thought.

As Northouse (2019) wrote, the type of relational-based interaction between leaders and followers described above still requires more research. However, it serves as an insight into how followers heavily influence the process of leadership. For too long, followers have mostly been dismissed and pushed off to the side. Now, leadership is no longer leader-centric but focused on the exchange that occurs with followers. It seems followers may perhaps retain more control of their relationships with their leaders than previously thought.

 

References:

Columbus, C. (1993). Mrs. Doubtfire. Twentieth Century Fox.

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

Leadership (Trait Approach Vs. Skills Approach)

by

As we all think about our own leadership abilities, sometimes we can’t help but wonder if we are made up for such a serious and responsible task. For those of us who has no knowledge of leadership and how a leader is formed or in some views born, it might be a challenging task to become one, either at our work place, school, amongst our own peers or even any given small tasks that we inherit spontaneously.

Well the truth of the matter as I have mentioned in my last blog is that not all leaders are born and now as we progress into the course and diverse types of leadership approaches, we came across trait approach. According to trait approach which believes that great leaders are born with a set of traits that qualify them and make them ideal for a leadership role and believe it or not only “great” people possess them (Northouse, 2016).

 

Well that couldn’t have been far from the truth in my opinion. For example, you might have heard someone say, “I can do anything” and even that shows confidence, that statement might be a bit stretched out from the actual truth.

If one individual trait is appropriate in a specific situation, it does not necessarily make them the right candidate for the next job. For example, if you were born to a family of police officers and law enforcement, chances are that at an early very age you were acquainted with the stories that your family told you about their daily activities on the patrol and (even though not all police officers patrol out streets) on the job. They even might have taken you on some ride along. That’s a perfect example of learned abilities at an early age and an example of Skills approach. With Skills Approach unlike Trait approach it is believed that leaders are trained with a set of traits and are not born with those traits.

 

Research for a long time has been trying to figure out leadership and they’ve come up with countless terms to define and explain personalities that would determine if we can see whom leaders are and whom are not. Research had broken down majority of these personalities into five major categories, for our sake. One, Consciousness or Dependability, Agreeableness, Neuroticism/Emotional Stability and Adjustment, Openness to Experience/ Intellectance and finally Extra version/ Surgency (PSU, 2018)

 

I believe there is no other book or course than can get in depth of leadership in my opinion than psych 485. The reason why I say this is that, all the material re straight forward and really explains the types of different leaderships, and leadership approaches. I have to say one thing that I know I will not forget is that, with trait approach we need to remember one size does not fit all. However, with Skilled Approach the skills necessary for the job can be taught and it has a way higher success rate than trait approach leadership.

 

As I bring this to an end I wanted to mention that Skills Approach has here subcategories; Technical, which in layman term “hand on” and this include factory workers, contractors, custodians and anything that involves hand on work. Second would be Human. This one would be a good example of social workers, therapists, and doctors. They have the skills that they have learned through school and obtaining knowledge to help their fellow mankind. The last one is Conceptual, and this is a notable example of the entrepreneurs. Those who want o to start their own business and think outside of the box. Always ready to make a move and start something new that could take them to the whole different level. I just wanted to mention some of the skills model that can be learned, rather than be born with according to trait approach.

Reference:

 

Northouse, P.G. (2016). Leadership: Theory and Practice. Seventh Edition. Los Angeles: Sage Publications

 

Pennsylvania State University, (2018). Psychology 485: Leadership in Work Setting, Lesson 2 and 4: Trait Approach and Skills Approach and

Skip to toolbar