A511.3.3.RB - Directive and Supportive Behaviors

Hello again! For this blog post I will be reflecting on the behavioral and situational approaches to leadership. In the behavioral approach of leadership, there are two main types of actions being either task or relationship oriented (Northouse, 2016, p. 71). The aim for task-oriented behaviors is to facilitate goal accomplishments whereas relationship-oriented behaviors aim at developing followers. These two leadership behaviors are considered to be independent of each other and can be viewed as a continuum as shown below with a concern for results (task-oriented behavior) versus concern for people (relationship-oriented behavior):

Photo: The leadership grid displaying generalized behaviors based on a continuum between concern for results and concern for people (Northouse, 2016, p. 76).

From the leadership grid, there are five distinct leadership styles that vary between the level in task behavior compared to relationship behavior. Switching off between authority-compliance management style and the country-club management style are considered paternalistic/maternalistic in that they aim at making key decisions by rewarding loyalty and punishing non-compliance. This is considered as not being effective method of leadership because it dissociates the workers from the task. When it is integrated in a team management approach, it becomes more effective because the two behavioral traits support one another (Blake & Mouton, 1981). This type of management is found at my work place in the laboratory because each section has their own area of responsibility and is able to meet mission requirements while following the strategic vision set forth by upper management (Romano, 2017). Our section has to meet certain capability criteria and is able to work with putting forth our own expertise to make it happen. This respect that is reciprocated allows people to become taken care of on a professional level because their opinions matter. The actions from the behavior of our leaders directly affect the tasks and relationships developed in an organization.

In the situational approach model of leadership, there is a focus on having a leader adapt their method depending on the situation. Similar to the behavior model in looking at actions as either task or relationship oriented, the situational model assesses directive and supportive behaviors (Northouse, 2016, p. 94). The directive behaviors are similar to the task-oriented actions in that they are aimed at accomplishing a goal. The supportive behaviors mimic the relationship-oriented action in developing a team that is able to contribute comfortably. The situational approach looks at the competencies of the workers and suggests a particular type of leadership in order to develop the worker as shown below:

Photo: Situational leadership diagram depicting four leadership styles based on directive and supportive behavior (Northouse, 2016, p. 95).

The ability of a leader to change their style between delegating, supporting, coaching, or directing can help to develop a worker to become more productive in their output. This leadership model has been successful in the marketplace setting where many scenarios can be analyzed and prescribed a practical method. This leadership model has been popularized by Dr. Paul Hersey in building leaders through diagnosing a company's performance readiness or competency level (CLS, 2018). A notable strength of this leadership model is that it has the flexibility to adapt depending on the situation so supportive behaviors can adjust as well as the directive behavior to best meet a worker's development level.

In both the behavioral and situational approaches, the relationship and supportive behaviors are in terms of being able for a leader to connect with their followers. This is in an attempt to inspire or motivate them to achieve goals. In my personal approach, the development of this type of relationship is embedded in a servant type leadership that consists of principles including empathy, awareness, building community, persuasion, conceptualization, and growth (Smale, 2018). These principles in terms of behavioral and situation seek to foster an environment that is relevant to the follower. Thus, a leader should behave in such a way that persuades followers to push towards an organization's vision by being empathetic to their personal development. This will allow the community to have greater passion for the mission through the clear conceptualization and awareness developed. The servant leadership allows two-way communication. So, if there is a misunderstanding or lack of competency, then it can be addressed immediately.

Blanchard (2008) includes a leader’s directive and supportive behaviors as the foundation of his situational leadership theory. Directive behavior typically represents a one-way communication where the leader directs the activity that the follower will complete. Supportive behaviors are considered “two-way” where the responses exhibit emotional and social support and the follower participates with the leader in the discussion. Consider some of your roles (parent, child, friend, leader, follower, etc.) and provide examples of how you use supportive and directive behaviors.

From childhood up to my college years, many of the tasks given to me were directive in nature. As a child, my parents were primarily directive by navigating what I did with my time from when I would be able to play with my friends to when I went to bed. As I grew up, they slowly progressed to become more supportive in helping me reach my academic and professional aspirations as a scientist and military officer. This mimics the country-club management and authority-compliance management style in the behavioral model of leadership that exhibits paternal/maternal characteristics. At first it was more authoritative, but then became more country-club style as I matured as a person. This is typical for many people where we get a sense of these types of leadership styles as we navigate life from childhood to adulthood. My college years were directive in nature with many professors and mentors preparing us for the real-world. They equip us with the base skills necessary to compete for a highly technical job or competitive position.

When I first started out in my career as a Program Manager, my team knew that I was fresh out of college and helped me to become a better leader and manager through supportive behaviors. The team was at a high competency level whereas me being a leader was lacking competency. Although I was in-charge of them, they knew that I needed their assistance to be effective in learning my position well. I would be given a tasking from upper management requesting information or a status report. From this, I would direct this action to my team, but did so in a manner that I was able to get the information through supportive behavior. I would take the time needed to learn from the technicians that would help me understand how it related to the tasking. It was important for me to learn from them and to develop the relationship first otherwise they would not have been open enough to give me the depth of information and would have been as minimal as possible otherwise. To create this atmosphere, I would figure out what kind of dessert or snack they liked and would make it for the whole team. This fostered a stronger relationship and built an atmosphere where they were more than happy to teach me that ended up making me a better leader and manager over time. I slowly began to move into a delegating and supporting role in the branch and was able to help out new workers that came into my team. I became more proficient and could teach the new workers a thing or two.

In my current position as Deputy Branch Chief, there is a balance between directive and supportive behaviors that I convey because the team is looking for my guidance on how we should proceed as a branch, but will only be as receptive if I can earn their trust as a leader and manager. For my team, we have a mix of senior and junior scientists so it is important that I am proficient in my position and can make the best decisions on behalf of the team to senior management. I have to exude more of a coaching and directive style of leadership because I am in-charge of many subject matter experts that need guidance on how to apply their talents in order to meet the mission. I have to train them in certain aspects administratively, but have to be able to trust them in their abilities as a scientist to give me the results that I need. In my position, it is important to relay the strategic and mission in a directive manner. As far as supportive behaviors go, I have to ensure that I take care of their career by giving them the proper recognition that they deserve for the work that they do. If any of my workers feels unappreciated, it affects morale which hurts team motivation. Thus, it is important to have supportive behaviors to ensure my workers are content on a personal level, but maintain my status as a Deputy Branch Chief by ensuring the mission is reached through appropriate directive actions.

References

Blake, R.R. & Mouton, J.S. (1981). Management by grid principles or situationalism: Which?. Group & Organizational Studies, 6(4), 439-455.

Blanchard, K. (2008). Situational leadership. Leadership Excellence, 25(5), 19.

CLS. (2018). Our history. The Center for Leadership Studies. Retrieved from http://situational.com/the-cls-difference/situational-leadership-who-we-are/

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

Romano, S.A. (2017, November 8). Ions and betas and treaties, oh my!. United States Air Force. Retrieved from http://www.25af.af.mil/News/Article-Display/Article/1368093/ions-and-betas-and-treaties-oh-my/

Smale, T. (2018, January 24). ‘Servant leadership’ and how its 6 main principles can boost the success of your startup. Entrepreneur Media, Inc. Retrieved from https://www.entrepreneur.com/article/307923

A511.2.3.RB - Reflecting on Leadership Traits

Welcome back to the second week! 😎 The focus of this discussion will be on the two models on leadership derived from either traits or skills. The trait-approach model is based on the theory that certain personality traits are innate within certain people that enable them to become leaders (Northouse, 2016, p. 40). From this stance, this theory was challenged to identify a definitive list of characteristics for leadership, which shifted to the interactions between leaders and their situation instead. In the skills-approach model, an emphasis on the competencies of a leader is centralized in three personal skills including: technical, human, and conceptual (Northouse, 2016, p. 69). The technical skills represent the proficiency in type of work, the human skills are interpersonal capability with dealing with people, and the conceptual skills is being able to work with ideas and concepts.

Between the two models, the research boils down to the actions that a leader takes based on their capabilities (skills) and personality characteristics (traits). There is a mix between a leader's own natural instincts and environmental situation along with the ability to learn and develop their proficiency as a leader over time. This is evident in a lecture that I have analyzed by Ms. Roselinde Torres (2013) that discusses what makes a great leader in the 21st century below:

Ms. Torres focuses on three questions that are based on either traits, skills or a mixture of both. The three questions on what makes a great leader are:

1. Where are you looking to anticipate the next change to your business model or your life?
2. What is the diversity measure of your personal and professional stakeholder network?
3. Are you courageous enough to abandon a practice that has made you successful in the past?

In the first question, the trait-approach would look at characteristics such as being proactive versus reactive and in the skills-approach would look at the developing a planning state-of-mind that can be refined with experience through a conceptual and technical basis. For the second question, it is the personality trait of sociability and emotional intelligence (EI) for the trait-approach and on the human interpersonal skills for the skills-approach model. Lastly, for the third question, the leadership characteristics of courage comes from self-confidence for the trait-approach model and the insight from a mixture of technical and conceptual skills in the skills-approach model.

Each of these questions can be analyzed through both models, but the most coherent depiction of reality combines the two models to give supporting details.

In considering the traits approach to leadership, what are some of your traits you consider adding or detracting from your ability to lead?

My job working as an U.S. Air Force Officer comes with living and practicing the three Air Force Core Values being: Integrity First, Service Before Self, and Excellence in All We Do (United States Air Force Academy, 2018). Each tenant holds different leadership traits that are pertinent to the core value. For 'Integrity First' the main traits of interest include honesty, courage, and accountability. In 'Service Before Self' characteristics of duty, loyalty and respect are paramount. Lastly, 'Excellence in All We Do' centralized on the aspects of mission, discipline, and teamwork.

Each of these core values have been instilled in me through my commissioning source starting in the Reserve Officer Training Corps (ROTC) program in college and has been maintained throughout my career. These core values are meant to be applied to our every action and has been supported through decades of military leaders.

After decades of studies of leadership traits (see image below), it was found that some traits were more consistent than others and included: intelligence, self-confidence, determination, integrity, and sociability (Northouse, 2016, p. 40).

Photo: Studies of leadership traits and characteristics adapted from "The Bases of Social Power" that provides a summary of traits identified by researchers from the trait-approach model of leadership (Northouse, 2016, p. 22).

These recurring traits can be linked to the Air Force Core Values with 'Integrity First' referring to the integrity trait, 'Service Before Self' to the sociability aspect, and 'Excellence in All We Do' as a combination of intelligence, self-confidence, and determination.

Overall, I would not detract from any of these traits, but rather will continue to work on each of these traits and hone them through the skills-approach model to become a better leader. It is important to practice the process of leadership because it takes experience to learn how to become a better leader. We all start with some leadership capability, but the potential that each of us can go varies based on how much effort, time, and care that we apply to our leadership style. According to Katz (1974, p. 91), much of these skills are developed through many years of experience and coaching. Technical skills are developed by learning it in industry or educational institutions over time. Human skills are rooted in psychology, sociology, and anthropology theories, but are best practiced by socializing with others with our own interpersonal capabilities. Lastly, our conceptual skills may be more abstract, but can be coached on from our mentors and leaders. All managers and leaders require competency in these skills in one way or another and can be applied with the various traits that each person has.

Considering Stogdill’s (1948, 1974) findings that leadership traits must be relevant to a leader’s actions (Northouse, 2015), how are traits important to your leadership style?

Stogdill contested the thought that all leaders possessed the same set of traits, but rather the traits that they possess must be relevant to the situation of the leader's function. In Stogdill's first set of survey results, there was an implied notion that leadership is determined by situational factors and modified it in his second survey that moderated traits and situation  (Northouse, 2016, p. 20). In his latter research, Stogdill found that the trait-approach is linked to leadership in the following ten characteristics:

1. Drive for responsibility and task completion.
2. Vigor and persistence in pursuit of goals.
3. Risk taking and originality in problem solving.
4. Drive to exercise initiative in social situations.
5. Self-confidence and sense of personal identity.
6. Willingness to accept consequences of decision and action.
7. Readiness to absorb interpersonal stress.
8. Willingness to tolerate frustration and delay.
9. Ability to influence other people's behavior.
10. Capacity to structure social interaction systems to the purpose at hand.

This shows the relevance of the situation in determining which traits a leader decides to exhibit. What can be used to distinguish leadership is the concept of EI. The idea can be summed up to the aspect of sociability and being able to connect with followers in order to earn the respect as a leader. According to Goleman (1998) there are five components of EI as shown below:

Photo: The five components of emotional intelligence at work (Goleman, 1998, p. 88).

These five components help connect our personality traits and capabilities that distinguish our leadership style. Goleman (2000) differentiated between six primary types of leadership being: commanding, visonary, affiliative, democratic, pacesetting, and coaching. Each leadership style utilizes certain traits more than others. In the commanding style, there is a demand for immediate compliance that is rooted in the drive to achieve, initiative, and self-control. For a visonary leader, their main goal is to move followers towards a vision through self-confidence and empathy as a catalyst for change. The affiliative leader aims at promoting harmony and creating emotional bonds with followers. They exude empathy through solid communication and relationship building. In a democratic leadership style, there aims to have a consensus through follower participation that leans heavily on collaboration and communication. A pacesetting leader sets the standard for performance and is conscientious on ability with a drive to achieve set by initiative. Lastly, the coaching style of leadership focuses on developing followers to become leaders for the future. They also exude empathy along with self-awareness to develop others.

The primary leadership traits that I portray would be considered sociability in terms of collaboration and intelligence in terms of technical and analytical abilities. I would say that my natural state for a leadership style would be considered to be affiliative and coaching. The way I interact with my co-workers and subordinates exude is people-oriented with a servant disposition. I aim to take care of my team and will cater to their needs so that they are able to do the best job as possible for the mission. In a laboratory setting that I currently work in, this type of leadership has worked well.

However, back in ROTC, I had to develop my commanding and democratic leadership. When working with the younger cadets, I had to utilize traits that embodied an authoritative figure while being democratic with my cohorts in making leadership decisions for the wing. From these life experiences, I have learned that certain personality traits are important for being applied to different leadership styles. Overall, we can hone traits that come more naturally to us and work on characteristics that may not come as easily when practicing a certain type of leadership. For some people, it may be easier to execute one leadership over another because it jives well with their innate characteristics, but for others it can be practiced on. Leadership is a process and is something that anyone can practice with their baseline traits that they have.

References

Goleman, D. (1998). What makes a leader?. Harvard Business Review, 76(6), 82-91.

Goleman, D. (2000). Leadership that gets results. Harvard Business Review, 78(2), 78-90.

Katz, R.L. (1974). Skills of an effective administrator. Harvard Business Review, 52(5), p. 90-102.

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

Torres, R. (2013). What it takes to be a great leader [Video File]. TED Conferences, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.ted.com/talks/roselinde_torres_what_it_takes_to_be_a_great_leader/transcript#t-516924

United States Air Force Academy. (2018). Character + leadership. United States Air Force. Retrieved from https://www.academyadmissions.com/the-experience/character/center-for-character-and-leadership-development/

A511.1.3.RB - Two-Way Street

Happy New Year! Welcome back to my blog. These next few months I will be answering prompts from my course on 'Organizational Leadership,' which focuses on leadership in the context of a management approach through a business or other organized system. This week I will discuss the distinction between management and leadership and how the process of leadership for a leader is also influenced by their followers.

Photo: Distinctions between the functions of management and leadership in terms of an organization (Northouse, 2016, p. 14).

The explanation of leadership has changed through the decades from being based in terms of dominance in the 1920s to becoming more scholarly focusing on influence, traits, and transformations in character motivation by the 1980s (Northouse, 2016, pp. 2-5). Currently, academia is focusing on the process and approaches of leadership rather than defining it. This is reinforced in the research done by Epitropaki et al (2017) that shows academic publications on leadership have recurring themes of leadership development and identity within the past decade. Leadership is not confined by a set of character traits, but is a process in which a leader develops with their followers to accomplish goals towards a vision.

One debate that still goes on is the difference between leadership and management. In a sense, management can be seen as a means to accomplish activities and optimize routines whereas leadership is able to influence others and create change. The list above depicting the functions of management and leadership shows these distinctions that are generally agreed upon by scholars. Leadership in this view is multidirectional in that a leader influences the relationship that it has with their followers on a personal level and management is unidirectional in using the worker to complete a task through authoritative power. Zaleznik (1977, p. 73) further emphasizes this point that managers are unidirectional by that they maintain the balance of operations for a business whereas leaders are able to create new approaches and are innovative in exploring new visions for a business. Managers tend to be more impersonal and passive in their attitudes towards goals because they are binded to the conceptions of work that are aimed at optimizing certain aspects of business (e.g. fast-tracking scheduling, decreasing personnel issues, etc.). On the other hand, leaders adopt an active attitude that is more invested personally with goals. Leaders can invoke a vision and can determine what direction a business takes.

Northouse (2015) indicated that leadership is a process and leaders affect and are affected by followers. Northouse further discussed that leadership involves influence. Think about a leader you have worked for, whom you have influenced. In what ways did you influence the leader?

In the dichotomy between leader and follower, each role follows through a transactional process that aims at developing a mutual purpose. This mutual purpose gives meaning and a motivation for the follower that is developed by the leader. Leaders inspire and motivate followers to accomplish goals in order to reach a vision. Leaders may be the focus of the group change and embodies the will of the group, but followers keep leaders accountable. This has progressively been noted with the growth in information through technology that has enabled followers to make leaders more transparent in the power structure (Northouse, 2016, p. 10). Leaders and followers are two sides of the same coin and can influence each other.

In my personal experience as being an Officer in the United States Air Force, there has been a range of leadership styles and approaches that I have been able to witness and experience as a subordinate. Being a junior officer at my new assignment working in an explosive processing facility, I was the link between the technicians and upper management. I was able to voice concerns to upper management and could create change and influence the decisions or policies on behalf of the technicians. For example, before an revision was made on a regulation or a new policy was directed, I would be able to inform upper management on the pros and cons and how it would affect us as a section. Upper management would take my inputs and it would affect how they imposed a new rule or would modify it to cover our concerns.

How did the relationship develop?

The relationship between myself and upper management developed to become more symbiotically trustworthy and mutually respected. I became more competent in my job and upper management listened to my inputs with more reliance. Eventually this developed the relationship where upper management would give me more responsibility because they knew I would be able to handle it and deliver. I was able to develop myself from working as a manager to a manager that could lead. This type of growth is mentioned by Zaleznik (1977, p. 76) in that the development of leaders through personal influences or one-to-one relationships helps to develop a culture of individualism for leadership. Ultimately, being a good follower to upper management allowed myself to grow into a leader for them. I was eventually allowed to voice my thought on what direction the organization should take because of the trust developed between myself and the leaders of the organization.

What was one important way in which you were impacted by your relationship with that leader?

An important way that I was impacted by this relationship with my leaders was that they genuinely cared in the mission as well as myself as a person and that motivated me as a worker/follower. Because of this, I was inspired and believed in the mission and purpose of the work myself and pushed hard to succeed on the goals set forth. This reflects the integrative definition by Winston & Patterson (2016, p. 7) that mentions leaders are able to influence followers and can utilize them to achieve organizational mission goals and objectives. This development of a strong relationship between leader and follower expends spiritual, emotional, and physical energy that creates a synergetic environment. This focus can be seen in the four pillars of resiliency that the U.S. Air Force (2014) practices that aims at developing spiritual, emotional, physical, and social success. The personal bond that is developed between leader and follower takes time and effort to develop and goes beyond the managerial position to a personal investment in trust and support that transcends organizational dogma to the leader's vision in directing the organization.

References

Epitropaki, O., Kark, R., Mainemelis, C. & Lord, R.G. (2017). Leadership and followership identiy processes: A multilevel review. The Leadership Quarterly, 28(1), 104-129.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2016.10.003

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

U.S. Air Force. (2014, August 19). Comprehensive airmen fitness: A lifestyle and culture. United States Air Force. Retrieved from http://www.af.mil/News/Article-Display/Article/494434/comprehensive-airman-fitness-a-lifestyle-and-culture/

Winston, B.E. & Patterson, K. (2006). An integrative definition of leadership. International Journal of Leadership Studies, 1(2), 6-66.

Zaleznik, A. (1977). Managers and leaders: Are they different?. Harvard Business Review, 55(3), 67-78.