Leadership

PSYCH 485 blog

Servant Leader’s Failures End Organization

by

As a regular part of my daily routine, I like to browse through some news on our local newspaper’s website. One of the stories posted this week on Pennlive.com that caught my attention described an organizational leader who was recently sentenced to prison for stealing money from his organization (Beauge, 2017). James M. McCloy was the former president of the Susquehanna House, which was a non-profit organization that provided housing, care, and other services for troubled youth (Beauge, 2017). As I read the story about how McCloy started his business, I can’t help but think that he was, at one point in his life, a great role model for servant leadership. However, his failures to continue to follow the concepts of servant leadership ultimately lead to the destruction of his organization.

As noted by Northouse (2016), servant leaders demonstrate behaviors that show the importance of putting their follower’s needs first (p. 225). Servant leaders are empathetic and ethical in their actions (Northouse, 2016, p. 225). Their behaviors as a leader benefit not only the organization, but also the community and society as a whole (Northouse, 2016, p. 226). Servant leaders put aside their own agendas and personal interests to focus on serving the needs of others (Northouse, 2016, p. 226). Robert Greenleaf, a researcher and developer of the servant leadership theory, emphasizes that servant leaders have a social responsibility to remove barriers of social injustice and to support those who are labeled as less privileged (Northouse, 2016,p. 227).

James McCloy began his career as the founder of the Susquehanna House by demonstrating many of the behaviors described in the servant leadership theory (Beauge, 2017). He had previously worked at another school for troubled youth when he learned about the Milton Hershey School, which is a very successful institution that provides care, housing, and education for troubled youth (Beauge, 2017). McCloy viewed the Milton Hershey School as a great example of what individuals can do to support the needs of others. Wanting to emulate this great organization, McCloy spend all his money and maxed out his credit cards to create a similar organization (Beauge, 2017). He demonstrated self-sacrifice in an effort to meet the needs of other people, the community, and society as a whole. Up to this point in his life, it would appear that McCloy was more concerned with helping others and his ethical, moral, and selfless service reflected the basic concepts of servant leadership.

Northouse (2016) presented a model of servant leadership that was developed as a collaborative effort between researchers. In this model, three main components are provided: antecedent conditions, servant leader behaviors, and leadership outcomes (Northouse, 2016, p. 231). Under the antecedent condition component lays context and culture, which is just one of the existing conditions that can influence servant leadership (Northouse, 2016, p. 231). The context and culture within an organization will determine how servant leadership is achieved within the organization (Northouse, 2016, p. 231). In a nonprofit organization, where caring for others is typically the key focus, servant leadership can thrive (Northouse, 2016, p. 231). The Susquehanna House, being a nonprofit organization that cared for others, provided the right context and culture for servant leadership to be effective. But, as the servant leadership model highlights, there is more to servant leadership then just the antecedent conditions.

The servant leader behavior component within the model of servant leadership provides a list of behaviors that are essential to the process of servant leadership. This list of behaviors includes the following (Northouse, 2016):

  1. Conceptualizing
  2. Emotional healing
  3. Putting followers first
  4. Helping followers grow and succeed
  5. Behaving ethically
  6. Empowering
  7. Creating value for the community

As president and founder of the Susquehanna House, McCloy employed many of these servant leadership behaviors. He provided, through his own funds, a place for troubled youth to grow and succeed. He identified a societal need for a place that troubled youth can be nurtured and cared for, with their needs coming first. He supported the community by providing a place that removed many of the barriers that may have influenced the troubles these youth faced. Nevertheless, his behaviors as a leader began to change as his organization started to face financial issues in 2009.

The final component in the servant leadership model is outcomes (Northouse, 2016, p. 236). Northouse (2016) noted from Greenleaf’s original work, “the central goal of servant leadership is to create healthy organizations that nurture individual growth, strengthen organizational performance, and, in the end, produce a positive impact on society” (p. 236). In the action of providing care and guidance for troubled youth, McCloy was helping them to grow and see their full potential as contributors to society. His behaviors and efforts as a servant leader may have influenced his followers to become servant leaders themselves. The Susquehanna House had a positive impact on society because they provided a place for local counties to send their troubled youth to get the attention they needed.

As a result of McCoy’s decision to misappropriate funds in an effort to better his own situation, the organization’s outcome on society declined. When the word got around that McCoy was arrested and charged with misappropriating funds and stealing money, the local counties stopped sending their troubled youth to the Susquehanna House (Beauge, 2017). Without the support of the local community, the organizational was forced to close (Beauge, 2017).

James McCloy started out his career as founder and president of the Susquehanna House demonstrating many of the critical concepts found in servant leadership. When his organization starting facing financial troubles, he decided to follow a path of unethically behavior. His own personal interests became his focal point. As a result of his change in servant leadership behavior, his organization was no longer able to provide the support they once gave to the local community and society as a whole. Providing servant leadership, especially in a non-profit type organization, can be the most effective and critical step in ensuring the operation of the organization is successful.

 

References:

Beauge, B. (2017, March 30). Founder of organization for troubled youth sentenced to prison for stealing $195,228. The Patriot News. Retrieved from http://www.pennlive.com/news/2017/03/founder_of_organization_for_tr.html

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

 

 

 

 

 

How to be Effective as the New Secretary of Education

by

Betsy DeVos has recently been selected to serve as the next United States Secretary of Education. With this public governmental position, Ms. DeVos has the power to influence many people and much educational policy. However, Ms. DeVos’s selection and her first few weeks in this leadership position have come with a considerable amount of public dissatisfaction (Perez-Pena, 2017). Some of this public disapproval stems from comments she made during her Senate confirmation hearing that did not demonstrate an adequate knowledge of the policies and laws that govern the education department with which she is to lead (Perez-Pena, 2017). Her experience within the government and with public schools are both lacking and this only adds to the negative public opinion that is currently reflected in the national news (Perez-Pena, 2017). Although Ms. DeVos has demonstrated a few behaviors that have not been well received, she does have the resources available to be a good leader. But, to be effective leader, she needs to understand the different types of power available to her and how to effectively use these different types of power to influence others.

According to Hughes et al. (1993), “leaders with relatively high amounts of power can cause fairly substantial changes in subordinates’ attitudes and behaviors” (p. 108). Given the high level of power available and the potential to apply a considerable amount of influence, Ms. DeVos must be aware of her capabilities as a leader. In addition to the different levels of power, there are also five bases of power that should be considered when determining the appropriate approach to influencing others. Each of the five sources of power come with their own advantages and disadvantages (Hughes et al., 1993). But, an effective leader will understand these differences and select the appropriate source of power that will complement the given situation, providing the appropriate form of influence (Hughes et al., 1993). It is important to note that these different sources of power can be used by followers to influence leaders, just as leaders utilize them to influence their followers (Hughes et al., 1993, p. 107).

The five bases of power include; expert power, referent power, legitimate power, reward power and coercive power (Hughes et al., p.114). Expert power relates to the amount of knowledge and experience an individual has in relation to other individuals within a particular team, group, or organization (Hughes et al., p. 114). Ms. DeVos has publically demonstrated that her knowledge in the area of public education policy and law has not reached the expert level. This source of power would not be a useful resource for her to use to influence others. Nevertheless, expert power is something that can change over time. To develop the capability to use this source of power, Ms. DeVos would need to expand her knowledge and experience in the area of education policy and law.

The next source of power is the referent power, which is impacted by the degree of relationship between the leader and follower (Hughes et al., 1993, p. 114). A leader who is well liked, admired, or is respected can have a positive influence on others (Hughes et al., 1993, p.115). Quite often the level of influence is determined by the strength of relationship between the leader and their followers (Hughes et al., 1993, p. 115). In Ms. DeVos situation, her relationship with the common citizen of the United States can be considered weak. The common citizen cannot relate to Ms. DeVos, who is extremely wealthy and comes from a wealthy family (Perez-Pena, 2017). Individuals working in the public school system have taken offensive to some of the public comments she has made with regards to their performance (Perez-Pena, 2017).Her ideas and views on the public education system have separated many followers and their support of her as an education leader (Perez-Pena, 2017). To use referent power as a source of influence, Ms. DeVos would need to generate more support from the general public and build a better relationship with those in the public school system.

Legitimate power is another source of power used to influence the attitudes and behaviors of others (Hughes et al., 1993, p. 115). This source of power is determined by the person’s position within the organization (Hughes et al., 1993, p. 115). With legitimate power, the authority given to an individual in a particular position allows them the ability to influence through the use of requests and demands (Hughes et al., 1993, p. 115). However, having legitimate authority will not be enough to make a person a good leader (Hughes et al., 1993, p. 116). To be an effective leader, the use of requests and demands will have to be appropriately applied to the situation. Constant demands will not be an effective means to influence everyone in every situation. Ms. DeVos’ position as Secretary of Education gives her a high level of legitimate power. She has the ability to provide requests to policy makers, but the government system will require more than just a request to influence their actions.

According to Hughes et al. (1993), reward power is based on the concept that resources, when controlled appropriately, can influence others (p. 116). These influential rewards can come in many forms, such as bonuses, promotions, or something as simple as praise and recognition (Hughes et al., 1993, p.116). Quite often the effectiveness of the reward to influence others will be determined by the follower and the situation (Hughes et al., 1993, p. 117). With the public forum readily available to Ms. DeVos, she can use public praise to garner the support of a particular audience and influence their actions towards a specific goal. Her ability to reward through support of specific education policy and influence agenda by her legitimate authority can also be a means to influence the behaviors and attitudes of others. Reward power is something that Ms. DeVos can use to offset her deficiencies in other sources of power. However, the use of her substantial fortune to reward political parties, as she has done in past positions, may not be an appropriate use of reward power in her current position (Perez-Pena, 2017).

The final source of power that has the potential to influence others is the use of coercive power. With the use of coercive power, an individual can influence through the possibility of negative repercussions, punishments, or denial of rewards (Hughes et al., 1993, p. 119). Similar to reward power, the extent to which coercive power can be used is dictated by the followers and the situation (Hughes et al.,1993, p. 119). In her previous position as Michigan Republican Party chairwoman and major Republican donor, Ms. DeVos relied heavily on her reward and coercive power to influence other politicians (Perez-Pena, 2017). As noted by Perez-Pena (2017) of the New York Times, Ms. DeVos was well know for the fear she instilled within Michigan politicians because of her ability to influence legislation and persuade the removal of foes that did not support her ideals. Her personal financial support will not be as influential in her current position. However, there are other forms of coercive power that can be utilized by her. She can deny her support of education policies or remove resources available to those in the education system if her ideas and views are not supported. Albeit coercive power should be used cautiously, as too much reliance of this as a form of influence may demonstrate a desire for control that is not supported by our social standards (Hughes et al., 1993, p.119).

Each of the five sources of power provides a capacity to influence others in a different manner. Understanding the use of each power source will enable leaders to be effective in the application of influence. Ms.DeVos has struggled to effectively influence support in her first few weeks in her new position as Secretary of Education. However, if she can appropriately incorporate all the different sources of power available, as the situation and follower dictates, she can improve her effectiveness as a leader.

References:

Hughes, R., et al. (1993). Power and Influence. Leadership: Enhancing the Lessons of Experience. (pp. 107-131). Homewood, IL. Irwin.

Perez-Pena, R. (2017, February 23). Betsy DeVos is Publicly Polite, but a Political Fighter. The New York Times. Retrieved from https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/23/us/politics/education-secretary-betsy-devos-donald-trump.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&clickSource=story-heading&module=first-column-region&region=top-news&WT.nav=top-news

 

Knowing the Unknowns

by

Occasionally I come across a topic that catches my interest and I am eager to research it further to find out more information. This generally comes as a result of pure excitement, yet there are moments where my interest comes from the unknown. The desire to known the unknown and make sense of it all is part of my character. Could it be pride, to know information before anyone else finds out? Or possibly it comes from the fear of being the last one to know, resulting in a given reputable label by others to show my lack of intelligence. Donald Rumsfeld once said, “There are known knowns. These are things we know that we know. There are known unknowns. That is to say, there are things that we know we don’t know. But there are also unknown unknowns. There are things we don’t know we don’t know.” This #PSYCH485 blog is not to share with you the unknowns of life, but to express my interest in a topic that seems unknown: authentic leadership.

There is a great amount of information on what authentic leadership is, why it is successful, and the like. Yet, it is not a fully developed theory, especially when viewing the moral side of it. It has not been fully explained, and as my #PSYCH485 course points out, “…it may turn out that this is not a useful theory after all.” (Lesson 12, p. 6). So what exactly is authentic leadership? Northouse (2015) defines it in three ways: interpersonal, intrapersonal, and developmental. Interpersonal refers to healthy relationships between a leader and a follower, with actions being present on both ends. Intrapersonal qualities describe a leader’s knowledge of him or herself through ways such as self-knowledge, behavior awareness, etc. Development explains that authentic leadership can be learned throughout life as people grow older and change their ways. (195-196).

Gruenfeld and Zander (2011) wrote an article about the downside of authentic leadership, and the consequence of it not being a fully developed theory. “Your authentic self should be the basis of your leadership style. But, it is better to take a good hard look at who you really are before showcasing and defending everything that comes naturally.” This seems to connect back to Rumsfeld’s quote in the first paragraph, about the unknown unknowns. A person may use their authentic leadership skills, but how can they lead with those when there are unknown dark spots within them that they have not been exposed to yet?

This led me to a personal question of whether or not I am an authentic leader. I used Michael Hyatt’s article to reach the conclusion of my own level of authentic leadership. Hyatt (2012) recognizes five characteristics that point towards an individual being an authentic leadership: insight, initiative, influence, impact, and integrity. Out of these five, the one that I feel I lack the most is impact. Impact is not something that is found in the leader, but rather it is found within the follower. Many times I find myself going through the motions in life, without making an impact on others. As a leader, I hope to make an impact but it is not always clear whether I am or not.

Authentic leadership can be a great leadership style, but because it is not fully developed, it is hard to say whether or not one must possess the characteristics within this theory in order to be successful. Regardless, the characteristics can be used as motivation to better oneself in ways that they may need. I will look at authentic leadership as a way to develop my skills, without solely using this theory to base my whole career from.

Reference:

http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/authors/d/donald_rumsfeld.html

Gruenfeld, Deborah., & Zander, Lauren., (February 3, 2011). Authentic Leadership Can Be Bad Leadership. Retrieved April 7, 2016 from https://hbr.org/2011/02/authentic-leadership-can-be-ba.

Hyatt, Michael. (July 3, 2012). The 5 Marks of Authentic Leadership. Retrieved April 8, 2016 from http://michaelhyatt.com/the-five-marks-of-authentic-leadership.html.

Northouse, Peter G. (Ed.). (2015). Leadership: Theory and Practice (7th Ed.).Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Pennsylvania State University (2016). Leadership in Work Settings—PSYCH 485. Online course lesson. Penn State World Campus. The Pennsylvania State University. Retrieved April 7, 2016 from https://courses.worldcampus.psu.edu/sp16/psych485/002/content/12_lesson/06_page.html.

A Place and Time for Sharing

by

Did you know there is a difference between a team and group? The difference might be greater than you expected. I believe it is safe to say that mostly all individuals have been a part of some sort of team or group at a point in their life. I was talking to my wife the other day to see if she could guess the difference. Her response to the question was, “Um, I don’t know. I’d guess that a group is less personal and a team works better together doing the same task.” She was surprised when I told her the real differences, those that I learned in my #PSYCH485 course commentary this week.

A group involves a strong influence that is passed back and forth between two or more people that are working towards the same goal by completing the same task. It is possible for a person to be in multiple groups at a given time. A team is interdependent, and involves multiple people working towards one goal by each individual contributing in their own way. Although each member of a team is working on their own personal task, they still need one another to accomplish the main mission. (Lesson 9, p. 3). I was under the impression that I worked within a group at my workplace, but the understanding and knowledge I gained from my college course has made me aware that I work in a team because each of us have our own tasks that in the end complete a project.

Fun fact: it is possible for group and team members to share the role of leadership. This unique way of sharing leadership has a name that suits it better than any name could…Shared Leadership. As it might have become evident at this point, shared leadership involves all team members having equal say and contribution to ideas and final decisions. Research has found that shared leadership is more effective because each member has their own strengths to offer to the rest of the group. (Lesson 9, p. 10). In traditional leadership, there is one leader who directs the rest of the team. Traditional leadership shows a top-down model, where the leader tells his or her peers where to start and guides the process. At times there are leaders who are such by name only, and have their peers bring the ideas to them. This is referred to as the bottom-up model. The shared-leadership model creates equality in the organization, as each person brings their own influence to others.

I have not yet worked in an organization that offers shared leadership. It could be difficult having a management team sharing responsibility with a lower level employee within the company, but is that not the point of shared leadership – to have individuals from all walks of life to add value and new perspectives to accomplish the goal? Management that is willing to establish shared leadership would show they value their employees, as they would work together and build relationships rather than one person commanding and controlling their way through the project.

It seems that there is a place and time for shared leadership. For instance, when I was in the United States Marine Corps, we did not share leadership to advance in our missions. With the nature of our work, it was always time sensitive. Sitting down and collaborating and sharing thoughts, ideas and opinions would jeopardize mission success and who would be coming home safe or not. Sometimes, (in this particular situation) it is best to make a decision without hesitation and run with it. In this environment any decision is better than no decision. So case in point, uniformity was key for this employer. If there was any deviation there could be severe consequences. Now, there are R&D teams and course developers for schools within the Marine Corps that does take the collaborative approach to hear input from each field practitioner but that was the proper time and place. Overall, I believe shared leadership is beneficial to an organization since each member of the team can contribute their ideas and skills, but I do not think that every organization should adopt the concept of shared leadership for the business they are running.

References:

Farag, Walid (2014). Boost Potential with Shared Authority and Lean Management. Retrieved on March 20, 2016 from: http://www.infoq.com/articles/shared- leadership

Pennsylvania State University (2016). Leadership in Work Settings—PSYCH 485. Online course lesson. Penn State World Campus. The Pennsylvania State University. Retrieved March 20, 2016 from https://courses.worldcampus.psu.edu/sp16/psych485/002/content/09_lesson/10_page.html

Justin Sardis – Psych 485 – Leadership & Diversity Blog Post

by

Justin Sardis

Psych 485

August 4th, 2015

Leadership & Diversity Blog Post

In most industries, the vast majority of leadership positions are held by men. Throughout history, women have done much to express this issue, but it has definitely taken quite some time for them to become leaders. Even though women have made some progress in attaining leadership roles, there is still a very large gap between the number of men who are C-level executives and the number of women who are C-level executives. For example, there have been 43 presidents of the United States, which were all men. Hilary Clinton has ran and is currently in the running to become the first female president of the United States. Another issue with diversity in regards to the previous United States presidents is that we didn’t have a president of a different race for 220 years, which changed when Barack Obama became the president of the United States in 2009. Therefore, even though a lack of diversity has been present for quite some time, our society today has given this issue much more attention than the amount of attention people paid to this subject years ago.

Gutworth has presented that there are numerous issues that occur due to
inconsiderate behaviors many people have toward those of a different gender, race or
ethnic background, such as viewing people of another race, gender, or ethnic background
as less knowledgeable or less credible as them self or as someone of their gender, race or
ethnicity (Gutworth, 2015). Therefore, this may have been a reason why many people
didn’t vote for Hillary Clinton when she first ran for president since some of them
probably thought that since she’s a woman, she wouldn’t have been able to run our
country. Another discriminative belief that people who didn’t vote for her may have came
up with is that they may have seen her as a liability because she is a woman and that they
would feel more comfortable if a man was their president. Another credible source that
has expressed a concern with people who view those of a different gender, race or ethnic
background as unequal is when Peter Northouse stated that some people live by
ethnocentrism and they are prejudice to others because they aren’t the same gender, race
or ethnicity as them (Northouse, 2013, p. 420).

It is very unfortunate, but there are definitely people out there who didn’t vote for Hillary Clinton because she is a woman and there are some people who didn’t vote for Obama because of the color of his skin, whether those particular people are willing to admit it or not. I totally disagree with that reasoning, but some people are both racist and sexist to this day, which needs to come to an end immediately. The lack of diversity has been an ongoing issue in various industries worldwide and in order for the amount of diversity to rise to a reasonable extent, egocentrism needs to stop completely and people can no longer be prejudice towards those of other genders, races, and ethnicities, which is going to be very difficult to do. In summary, the lack of diversity is less of an issue today than it has been more many years, but there is still much to be done to lessen the gap between the amount of male leaders there are and female leaders there are, in addition to increasing the amount of diverse leaders. Even though problems will likely arise in the process of making our society more diverse, the benefits will be recognized in doing so and people will realize that they won’t regret it.

References

1. Gutworth, M., (2015), PSYCH 485: Leadership in Work Settings, Penn State Angel, Retrieved from:
https://courses.worldcampus.psu.edu/su15/psych485/002/content/13_lesson/06_page.html

2. Northouse, P. (2013). Leadership: Theory and practice (6th ed.). Los Angeles: Sage
Publications.

Skip to toolbar