A511.6.3.RB - A Leader From the Past

Think about your leaders from the past and reflect on their qualities. Did any of them exhibit the qualities of a transformational leader? Did the leader exhibit certain elements that made you want to work harder? In what ways were you transformed by the leader you are describing?

Reminiscing on leaders from my childhood brings back memories of superheroes as role models while growing up. The depiction of Spider-Man battling the Green Goblin or Batman fighting The Joker to save humanity represented the archetypal ideals. These figures represented the good versus evil and presented a moral example on which we hope to mimic after. This is still evident today with productions of classic comics such as Wonder Woman on the big screen to showcase fanciful example of superheroes acting on behalf of humanity.

Video: In the scene above, Steve expresses the impossibility of crossing over due to a deadlock state against the German front to Diana. However, Diana believes that she will be able to cross it by deflecting incoming bullets and risks her life to show that it is possible (Warner Bros, 2017).

These heightened displays of heroic actions in comics show fanciful versions of transformational leadership. These creations involves a storyline that can invoke influence for us to become better or to inspire us to reach our goals that may seem distant and unachievable. This type of invigoration that is developed is a similar fire that transformational leadership can provide as well. Transformational leadership is reached when those who are able to lead influence others to go beyond their self-interest to accomplish tasks that are more than what is expected of them. These leaders light that fire within individuals to go beyond by fulfilling their human potential of what they did not think was possible. When I think a leader that is able to develop this superhero-like inspiration, I reflect on my time in college with my Reserve Officer Training Corps (ROTC) instructor, Lt Col Michael D. Eliason.

Lt Col Michael D. Eliason has the textbook definition of a transformational leader by not only portraying a charismatic and visonary leadership, but also cared about our values, ethics, and long-term goals that we had as cadets (Northouse, 2016, p. 161). There was that 'professional distance' between him and our class from being an instructor, but yet he was able to be personal by remembering the small details about us. These types of details ranged from our class schedule to more personal details such as our own hobbies and interests. This relates to the Leadership Member Exchange (LMX) theory in the fact that our instructor was able to crate a unique relationship with each of us that made us feel as part of an in-group. Furthermore, he resembled a superhero to us from what he had experienced during his time in the Air Force. He was a pilot flying the B-1 Lancer bomber plane and had many great war-fighting stories. His story-telling was an exuberant and engaging ordeal that captivated each and every one of us.

Through his story-telling, there was always a moral to be taught or something to be learned. This hits one of the main core aspects of transformational leaders by being grounded in a moral matrix. According to Bass & Steidlmeier (1999, p. 181) there are three aspects in regards to ethics that are of concern:

1. Moral character of leaders and concern for self and others.
2. Ethical values embedded in the leader's vision, articulation, and program, which followers can embrace or reject.
3. Morality of the processes of social ethical choices and actions in which the leaders and followers engage and collectively pursue.

Lt Col Eliason went onto many tangents during our class that started out with a core discussion topic to a personal story of his. Although I do not quite remember the details of the story itself, I recall the main point of the story. A few of my favorite lessons include: being able to succeed no matter where you end up with an analogy to a plant by blooming wherever you are planted; you can learn as much from a bad leader as you can from a good leader in a sense of what not to do; and to put people first by caring about them because people will not remember what you did, but will remember how you made them feel. These types of lessons when given after a personal connection is developed from a leader helps to leave a mark that resonates within the in individual.

Lt Col Eliason was a transformational leader because his focus was beyond self-interest from his or the follower's perspective and aimed at creating an environment of empowerment and esprit de corps. Bass (1999, p. 11) notes that when leaders are able to use idealized influence (charisma), intellectual stimulation, and individualized consideration to foster inspiration on a grander scale then transformational teams are developed that end up being high-performing through achievement and self-actualization.

A transformational team is powerful because not only are each individual inspired, but they end up inspiring each other as well as the leader of what they are capable of. When thinking of how Lt Col Eliason developed this type of atmosphere, he really was able to develop trust, loyalty, and respect with each one of us. This started out with a transactional reward system where cadets were recognized based on their performance in academics, athletics, or service. He would assigned us various tasks that we were responsible for and would gauge our progress and give suggestions on how to succeed. He was able to utilize a supportive type of leadership as outlined in Path-Goal Theory (PGT) that taught us how to carry out and practice a leadership role in the unit.

By fostering these different transactional elements in terms of recognition with supportive leadership behavior, Lt Col Eliason was able to move towards an achievement-oriented leadership that provided challenges to further develop us into leaders. Bass (1999, p. 13) points out that in LMX theory transactional methods are typically used in the first and second phase (stranger and acquaintance) between leaders and followers that moved towards being transformational in the third phase (partnership). Lt Col Eliason was able to use his charismatic leadership to progress towards a transformational team by remaining dominant and influential pushing us to gain a higher sense of self-esteem. Ultimately, this developed our confidence that improved our self-efficacy pushing us to work harder for our ROTC detachment as a whole.

From my own experience, I was changed by learning how to trust my own intuition through finding my leadership style in this training environment. By having a collective culture in our detachment, it provided an atmosphere that helped to facilitate the growth of a transformational team with the direction from Lt Col Eliason. Because of the mentality of our detachment through our core values derived for the Air Force (Integrity First, Service Before Self, and Excellence in All We Do), we had a unifying purpose. As we became seniors, we became mentors to the freshmen class because we had the responsibility to take care of them. I was able to practice developing a professional relationship with the underclassmen and help with any issues they may be facing similar to how Lt Col Eliason and the upperclassmen did for us. I realized that I had leadership potential from being able to develop and practice it. I was able to embody elements of Lt Col Eliason's leadership and emulate being a transformational leader as well.

References

Bass, B.M. (1999). Two decades of research and development in transformational leadership. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 8(1), 9-32.

Bass, B.M. & Steidlmeier, P. (1999). Ethics, character, and authentic transformational leadership behavior. Leadership Quarterly, 10(2), 181-217.

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

Warner Bros [Filmic Box]. (2017, August 29). No man's land scene | wonder woman (2017) movie clip [Video File]. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MlwHKphUU_Y

A511.5.3.RB - Mid-Term Reflection

You have reviewed a number of theories and concepts associated with leadership up to this point in the course. You have likely been associated with individuals who led using some or all of these principles. Therefore, you should have your own opinions about which leadership theories work well and which may be less effective or less representative of those used in the "real world." After watching the TED talk consider the following questions:

The lecture that Talgam (2009) gives is based on various styles of conductors and how it relates to leadership. The insight from this examination reveals how developing the musicians (followers) to become more autonomous from learning from the conductor (leader) is a pinnacle mark of an orchestra (team). The conductor is able to back away from giving direction from a baton because the musicians 'know' what is the cue is because they are in sync. Talgam (2009) shows this through examples of conductors leading that range from authoritative commands to others that are flexible, but in-command and emotionally tuned.

How do you interpret Talgam’s ideas?

Talgam (2009) first notes the scope of what a music hall entails which is analogous to an organization. The music hall represents not only the musicians and conductor, but the efforts of the architects that built the music hall, the quality of the instruments being played, and the audience enjoying the performance. These aspects are all supporting elements that have been able to bring about the success of the establishment. This particular idea does not directly corresponds to an immediate theory in management or leadership, but puts the music hall (organization) at the focus and implies that a good conductor (leader) is able to appreciate in its entirety.

A second idea that Talgam (2009) brings up is that the style of conductors can vary from being authoritative to relaxed. The authoritative style of Muti was overbearing and directive when it did not need to be. This type of leadership did not bode well with the musicians and escalated to 700 of them to sign a petition to get Muti to resign form being conductor. His authoritarian style of leadership did not allow them to develop as musicians and they felt like objects rather than people. This ties into the Path-Goal Theory (PGT) which is geared towards enhancing follower performance and satisfaction by having the leader supplement what is missing in an environment (Northouse, 2016, p. 115). Muti need to be more supportive or achievement-oriented to allow the musicians to grow and develop as performers. The dogmatic and authoritative approach was too restricting and did not fit the atmosphere of the La Scala music hall. With the musicians having the technical capability and talent, Muti just needed to provide nurturance to the musicians that would have allowed them to thrive. The conductor's job is to help followers reach their goals through direction, guidance, and coaching along the way.

This example that Talgam (2009) touches on is based on the different types of control that exists as leader. This next idea can be tied back to our text on the six bases of power including reference, expert, legitimate, reward, coercive, and information (Northouse, 2016, p. 10). Muti utilized coercive and legitimate power that did not work well with the musicians. In a contrasting example, Talgam (2009) showed Strauss and Karajan's conducting skills that showed the same legitimate, but also referent and expert power. The expert power was apparent because the musicians did not need clear instruction during the performance, but learned how to listen to each other and act as a cohesive ensemble. As Strauss' first rule states that the music is not for the conductor to enjoy, but for the audience (Wise, 2014). This is interpreted by Talgam (2009), that a conductor should not have to force the music, but to allow it to develop with no interference. This is because the interpretation of the story by the performer is the real story being told.

Another reason according to Talgam (2009) on conductors not giving clear instruction is because it would prevent the musicians from acting as a cohesive ensemble. Talgam is hinting at the team management component of the behavioral approach. This leadership style has a high concern for people and a high concern for results (Northouse, 2016, p. 76). This means that the orchestra already has committed individuals that are fully engaged in a common purpose and need to work interdependently to achieve the goal. This allows the ensemble to grow and develop through working with each other laterally rather than being directed on what to do. The musicians do not have the authority to change the production, but will have to interpret the conductor's vision with their own technical capabilities and intuition.

In terms of a situational approach, the conductor just needs to lead with supportive leadership that is lower in direction, but high in support. This is highlighted by Talgam (2009) in pointing out that conductors need to open up the space for the musicians to add another layer to the overall symphony. Talgam (2009) further depicts this as a rollercoaster that is created by the conductor into the musician's mind. He extends this metaphor to include the musician and conductor building the rollercoaster so that the two act in partnership. This relates to the latest chapter on Leadership-Member Exchange (LMX) Theory where the focus is on interactions between leader and followers. There are the three phases in leadership that follows different stages being strangers to acquaintances to partnerships (Northouse, 2016, p. 143). This shows the progression in the relationship between follower and leader being further invested as an ensemble. Most of the musicians are heavily devoted and work with each other in a reciprocal manner to complete the symphony. The musicians are able to develop and hone their skills as an artist and the conductor is able to execute the symphony with a cohesive ensemble into one magnificent masterpiece.

What are the parallels or disconnects between Talgam’s ideas about how conductors lead and what you know now about leadership?

There are many parallels between Talgam's ideas on how conductors lead and how leadership is understood theoretically and in practice. The first is that authority by itself is not enough to make your followers become partners. This stems back to the initial chapter in our textbook that distinguished how leadership was understood. It was first seen as being focused on dominance and moved to influence and transformations in character motivations (Northouse, 2016, pp. 2-5). This reflects how Muti conducted versus all of the other conductors introduced. Muti was too focused on clear direction, but was too authoritative and coercive in his leading that was off-putting to many in the ensemble.

This is true in my experience as well because if a supervisor is too aggressive in their demands it can cause burnout or shutdown in productivity. For example, at my workplace we were put on an accelerated schedule to reach full operational capability in terms of qualifying our capabilities as a laboratory. This meant that the team, comprised of civilians, contractors, and military, had to put in hours long past the standard eight when possible. At first we were able to adjust for a few weeks, but as time went on it wore on all of us. People ended up making careless mistakes in the lab and overall morale declined. This type of behavior from our leadership was of the authority-compliance method of management that strived for results with little concern for people. When the mistakes started happening, upper management had to reel back and reassess the schedule of reaching full operational capability. The safety of the people was of concern and should not have been risked for the mission requirement sake. The overall schedule should have been re-evaluated and adjusted or the team leads should have spoken up when there was a noticeable decrease in morale and productivity due to employees becoming burnt out from work.

Another notable parallel is the emphasis that conducting not only creates a process, but also creates the conditions for which the ensemble is able to learn and develop as musicians. This touches on two primary aspects of the book being that (1) leadership is a process and (2) a leader's job is to help followers reach their goals according to PGT. Leadership is a process because it works through influencing followers to accomplish a task. This is explained by Northouse (2016, p. 6) that it is a transactional event that occurs between leader and follower that is not a one-way event, but interactive. It is important for leaders to create conditions through a process to develop content in order to create meaning for followers.

This leads to PGT theory in terms of the follower's motivation and helping them succeed their professional goals. Whatever obstacles exist, it is the leader's prerogative to help the follower by creating an environment so that they can reach their goals. In the lecture, Talgam (2009) noted that the musicians wanted to be able to hone their musical capabilities and not be treated as a prop. Some of the conductors were able to create an environment that challenged the musicians to develop their musical aptitude based on the conditions of the conductor. This is similar to what I experience in a laboratory setting in what our employee's goals are. Many of our technically skilled and doctorate level employees thrive on challenges that allows them to think critically. An achievement-oriented leadership is utilized at our workplace that attempts to limit as much of the administrative burdens as possible so that our subject matter experts can just focus on what they are passionate about.

This segues into LMX theory because it is something that upper management knows is an issue for many of the employees. The employees have vocalized how much it detracts from the time that they have to work and how it impacts their productivity. The administrative paperwork is kept down to a minimum as possible with a few key personnel dealing with it. This results in many of our skilled and talented members able to do what they care about. Our workers are able to become more autonomous with the ability to reach their goals with the conditions set by upper management. This ends up making the employee more proud of their work that satisfies their intrinsic goals as well as the goals of the organization. This helps to develop these employees into partnership phase of LMX theory because they become more invested with their work and become more concerned for the goals of the organization rather than their own personal goals.

Another aspect of LMX theory is also parallel to what Talgam (2009) shows in his lecture towards the end. In the last video, the conductor does not lead any more with the baton, but rather watches in satisfaction as his orchestra being able to play masterfully without his direction. The leader has been able to guide and create the conditions that allows the followers to tell the story to the whole audience by themselves. The conductor has been able to train the musicians to the point where the musicians became self-sufficient to perform on their own. In a sense, it is a reversal in the roles where the musicians are able to lead themselves without the assistance of direction. The conductor in this video shows the best type of feedback that is a unspoken compliment, but rather an emotional facial response that exuded satisfaction and content.

This connects to what many leaders hope to achieve with their followers by being able to inspire them to reach their own goals by the own doing. Many leaders hope to develop their employees to become better than they were before whether it is a certain skillset or other professional developments. Leaders aim to develop some of their followers to become leaders as well. From my own experience in the military, officers are expected to lead and are given more responsibility as they progress throughout their careers. Senior leaders hope to develop junior officers to take their positions in the future. With this mentorship, the aim is to progress officers to progress from being a follower to a leader in their own right.

References

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

Talgam, I. (2009). Lead like the great conductors [Video File]. TED Conferences, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.ted.com/talks/itay_talgam_lead_like_the_great_conductors/transcript

Wise, B. (2014, June 9). Richard Strauss's 10 golden rules for young conductors. New York Public Radio. Retrieved from https://www.wqxr.org/story/richard-strausss-ten-golden-rules-young-conductors/

A511.4.3.RB - Locus of Control

Welcome back! This discussion post will delve into my results based on Rotter's Locus of Control Scale Test in conjunction with my own leadership behaviors. The term locus of control refers to the concept of generalized expectancies for control of reinforcement (Mearnes, 2017). This means that depending on a person's outlook, their beliefs determines the cause of an experience or event as being either a success or failure. There are two primary distinctions for locus of control as being either internal or external.

Photo: Cartoon scenario depicting locus of control being internal or external (Campbell, 2015).

An internal locus of control means that a person will consider their success or failures based on their own effort and abilities. On the other hand, a person with an external locus of control will consider the success or failure based on chance, luck, or fate. These two locus of controls are not discrete, but are part of a continuum and individuals can have experiences that vary between the two loci. Some people would argue that locus of control is an innate characteristic, but others suggest that it can be shaped by life experience. For example, a child that is encouraged to be independent and makes connections between actions and consequences have been shown to have developed a stronger sense of an internal locus of control (Joelson, 2017). If the development of a strong and positive internal locus of control can be influenced, then it would suggest that self-motivated individuals can be developed. In terms of leadership, would a person with an internal locus of control be better than one with an external locus of control? Let me contemplate on my own personal experience...

Complete Rotter’s Locus of Control Scale Test. Based on your results, is your locus of control external or internal? Reflect on how your locus of control affects your leadership behavior and your responses to others’ leadership styles or is this a bunch of poppycock?

Photo: My personal results from the Rotter's Locus of Control Scale.

Based on the Rotter's Locus of Control Scale, I received a rating of having a strong internal locus of control. I agree with this result because I do relate my success and failures based on my own effort. Since childhood, there has been a constant push from my parents to strive for success especially in academics. They made it clear that the effort I put forth into homework and studying would payoff in being able to ace an exam and excel in the class. This cultivation of an internal locus of control is related to what Ahlin & Antunes (2015) found in youth being able to become more well-adjusted when facing uncertainty and the ability to deal with stress in a more effective manner compared to those with an external locus of control. This would also be applied to other aspects of my life while growing up. Through my teen years, I became more self-sufficient and self-motivating in tackling various projects and goals. Any challenges that I faced were solved through my own belief in my control and capabilities. Now, I have become entirely independent and have been able to lead others to achieve the same sense of self-efficacy that I have managed to develop.

In terms of leadership, a leader with a strong internal locus of control is more traditional in the sense that they are able to transform a business because they believe they are able to do so. This relates to our textbook description of leadership in that to lead is a means to influence others and to create visions for a change (Northouse, 2016, p. 14). This belief turns into action which then brings results and ultimately change. A person with a strong positive internal locus of control can be more motivated to succeed and will take the effort needed to learn. Whereas, a person with an external locus of control will most likely not put forth the time needed for the same cause. Howell (1993) found that managers with an internal locus of control showed "greater confidence in their ability to influence the environment, are more capable in dealing with stressful situations, place greater reliance on open and supportive means of influence, pursue riskier and more innovative company strategies, and generate higher group and company performance than do externally oriented managers." Thus, the proactive attributes associated with an internal locus of control gives power to an individual in being able to make an effort to make change. On the contrary, those with an external locus of control takes power away from the individual that will make them more reactive instead to experiences.

The locus of control concept can be related to the Path-Goal Theory discussed in class this week. This theory describes the ability of a leader to enhance follower performance and satisfaction by utilizing a particular leadership style in an organizational setting by removing obstacles (Northouse, 2016, p. 115). The leaders in an organization will have to define a goal outlined with a plan while providing support to the followers. Leaders have to utilize various types of leadership behaviors such as directive, supportive, participative, or achievement oriented based on the task and worker characteristics. If a leader does not think that they are able to remove an obstacle then their have an external locus of control mindset and will not put much effort forth to resolve the issue. However, if they keep on searching for a way to overcome an obstacle and are able to maintain an internal locus of control, then they should exhaust every option until a solution is obtained. The active search in resolving an obstacle is a key component in a positive internal locus of control mindset that pushes to resolution. 

Photo: Calvin and Hobbes comic book strip depicting a comedic interpretation of the external locus of control (Calvin and Hobbes, 1988).

References

Ahlin, E.M. & Antunes, M.J. (2015). Locus of control orientation: Parents, peers, and place. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 44(9), 1803-1818.

Calvin and Hobbes. (1988, June 7) I've decided to be a fatalist. [Cartoon] Universal Uclick. Retrieved from http://www.gocomics.com/calvinandhobbes/1988/06/07

Campbell, I. (2015, May 15) Failure: Locus of control. [Cartoon] Bitstrips. Retrieved from https://isobelcampbell.wordpress.com/author/isobelcampbell/page/3/

Howell, J.M. (1993). Transformational leadership, transactional leadership, locus of control, and support for innovation: Key predictors of consolidated-business-unit performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78(6), 891-902.

Joelson, R.B. (2017, August 2). Locus of control: How do we determine our successes and failures?. Psychology Today. Retrieved from https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/moments-matter/201708/locus-control

Mearnes, J. (2017). The social learning theory of Julian B. Rotter. California State University, Fullerton. Retrieved from http://psych.fullerton.edu/jmearns/rotter.htm

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

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.

A500.9.3.RB - Course Reflections

It's been a little while, but I am back with a reflection on a course I have been finishing up called 'Leadership Foundations in Research.' I will sum up the key pieces of information that have resonated with me as well as highlighted moments from the experience. Hope you enjoy and are able to take a some gems with you! 😊👏

Photo: A well-recognized sculpted piece of art depicting the mental anguish or contemplation known as 'The Thinker' created by French artist Auguste Rodin (Rodin, 1901).

Reflect on your perceived value of this course. Include both positive and negative aspects of your experience. What might you have done to improve your learning experience in this course?

The purpose of this class was to develop critical thinking skills, recognize fallacies, and conduct a project through action research methodology. The opening of the course focused on critical thinking by overcoming and understanding the pitfalls of fallacious thinking. It showed a lengthly list of common fallacies that people may intentionally or inadvertently commit (Dowden, 2003). For example, people may go with traditional wisdom because it has always been done a certain way, but it may not be substantiated by facts or evidence. By understanding how to breakdown and reflect on our thinking helped to lead in finding what the 'truth' is. This was insightful because it captured common misleading arguments that can seem to make sense on the surface, but are not internally consistent. This leads to some key points when thinking about reasoning by The Critical Thinking Community (2015) which analyzes thinking as such:

• All reasoning has a purpose
• All reasoning is an attempt to figure something out, to settle some question, to solve some problem
• All reasoning is based on assumptions
• All reasoning is done from some point of view
• All reasoning is based on data, information, and evidence
• All reasoning is expressed through, and shaped by, concepts and ideas
• All reasoning contains inferences by which we draw conclusions and give meaning to data
• All reasoning leads somewhere, has implications and consequences

Incorporating these ideas into my thought process and reflecting on my own thinking has allowed me to refine how I think. This has been an overall positive impact because it helped bring substance to how concretely I find truth and apply it to my everyday thinking. This is seen through understanding action research and its aim in allowing us as an individual to conduct research and learn from it through our own experience. By using these techniques developed in this class, I will be able to continue on assessing my own thought process in a critical manner and can continue to conduct thorough action research to better live my life.

How might the University or your instructor provide additional support for your learning?

Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University and the instructors do very well in keeping the courses consistent and relatable to one another. Each course helps to build on each other and has applicable information that is useful to my professional and even personal life. I think that everything that the university is doing currently is effective and is the right amount for me to process as I work on completing my degree.

Were there topics covered in this course that seem particularly relevant or irrelevant to your experiences and to what you expect to come in future courses?

This course was a great stepping stone into my core capstone courses and I look forward to see how the other classes develop with this as the fundamental starting point. All of the topics so far fit in well and made sense in the grand scheme of things. Looking forward for more to come!

References

Dowden, B. (2003). Fallacies. California State University. Retrieved from http://www.iep.utm.edu/fallacy/

Rodin, A. (1901). The thinker (le penseur) [Sculpture]. Retrieved from https://www.nga.gov/Collection/art-object-page.1005.html

The Critical Thinking Community. (2015). The analysis and assessment of thinking. Foundation for Critical Thinking. Retrieved from http://www.criticalthinking.org/pages/the-analysis-amp-assessment-of-thinking/497