As we talk about transformational leadership one subset that sticks out is charismatic leadership. Charismatic leadership in my eyes goes in conjunction with authentic leadership. Personalities who show charismatic leadership possess dominate and confident traits along with an uncanny desire to influence, but are those all authentic? On the top many will argue yes, but a startling article has showed me this is not true. In the attached link below, the article describes professionals who are actually trained to teach their clients on how to fake charisma. What has the world come to? The women who wrote the article is an actual leadership coach! There is not an inch in my body that agrees with this practice. Illinois, our home state, is full of corruption. Do you think our governors were victims to leadership coaches? I think the correlation can be significant enough.
It is mind boggling that the people who we look up to are actually faker than plastic surgery! She states that it helps clients develop their own brand of charisma, but how can charisma be your own if it is fake! If this is the case, we might as well toss all of the people who have been inspirational to us through our lives and find new role models. The first “I” of transformational leadership is idealized influence charisma, which is described as acting as strong role models, having high standards of moral and ethical conduct, and making others want to follow the leader's vision. How in the world can you call yourself a leader when everything is a lie. We might as well call Kennith Lay a leader! He was pretty good at faking who he actually was. Give me some opinions on this! I was shocked to hear that professions like these exist.
Since it was just Masters Sunday, it seems appropriate to talk about the leaders in the golf world; specifically Tiger Woods. Golf still remains one of the truest games today that has been untouched by the media cloud that seems to smash and cause controversy in every professional sport. Until Tiger Woods botched up his image with an unimaginable car crash that later revealed a sex addict rippled with affairs, he was untouchable. Woods was the face of all sports. In my time, I have never found an athlete that could compare to his compassion and charisma on and off the course. Tiger Woods has an unmatched drive for perfection that many athletes couldn't even come close to replicating by a fraction of a percent during their whole career. This is what makes him so dominating. Is that why Tiger is an authentic leader? I believe so. Authentic leadership is characterized by exhibiting genuine leadership, leading from conviction, are originals, and base their actions on their values. Woods makes up all these characteristics and more.
To start Woods is genuine, he has been in the spotlight since he was barely able to walk as a guest on the Johnny Carson show. His drive and determination started as a young kid, and led him to be a star at Stanford University. He leads by conviction by never thinking he is perfect until he wins every tournament he enters, and what makes him original is he is of African American and Asian descent. There has never been a black athlete, let alone the richest athlete in history accomplish what he has. Original is an understatement for Woods because if there was someone more original, we would be talking about them and not Woods. Finally, we arrive at Wood's values. Being from a military background, drive and determination was instilled from a young age through his father, Earl. One thing that seems to be misunderstood in calling him a authentic leader, is the recent events that tarnished a great deal of his name. How can this be? Do most authentic leaders lead enough to see themselves turn bad as seen in the blockbuster hit “the Dark Knight” by the main character who turns into Two-Face? What do you think?
This article discusses what is necessary for a person to be a good boss, and it immediately drew my mind to the psychodynamic approach of leadership. I thought of the psychodynamic approach because it looks at personalities and at certain tendencies and qualities that people have.
The psychodynamic approach is useful for this situation because it can look at how the personality of the leader (boss) relates to the follower and vice versa. Certain situations in an organizational setting may require different personality types. For example, when looking at Jung’s classification of personality types, a top level position may require an intuitor because they are typically strategic thinkers and they plan for the future. An intuitor may find it easier to see the big picture. At a lower level position, a sensor may be a better fit because they are typically practical and detail oriented, which allows them to follow the direction of upper level management. However, because sensors are detail oriented and less imaginative than intuitors, they may find it more difficult to come up with new ideas.
I have a few ideas for how organizations could apply this information in order to get the most out of their leaders/managers and other employees. Organizations would benefit if they could find a way to place managers at a level that would be best suited by that person’s personality. The organization and the leader would also both benefit when a person is placed in a position because it will allow them to comfortably handle the situations at hand. Every personality type can be effective in a given situation. They key is to look at the person’s personality type, including any particular tendencies they may have, and fit the personality type to an appropriate situation.
Do you think that this application might be useful in an organization, or do you think that the leader would find it easier to adapt themselves to a particular situation?
As we have studied the various types of leadership styles, certain styles have caught my attention more than others. And this is my questions, "Where can I find an authentic leader to work for?"
As most of us will searching for full time jobs after graduation in a month, we will find ourselves working at the bottom of ladder. I know that if I was in that position, I would like to find myself working for an authentic leader. The five dimensions of authentic leadership outlined in the book by Bill George, represent characteristics of a boss that I'm sure all of us would like to work for.
I spent my last summer in Beijing for a smaller business working under one of the managers of the company. I faced a few problems in working with this manager as I was looking for a more personal experience including guidance in my efforts to produce work to meet this managers standards. I received much more of a transactional leadership experience as I truly only had one legitimate conversation with him over the course of the summer. While Shane, my boss, may have shown a few of the dimensions of an authentic leader, he lacked in creating relationships with those he was leading. While this may have been the only dimension he was missing, it was significant enough that he was not the authentic leader that I wish I had.
What kind of leaders have you worked for in the past? What kind would you prefer to work for? How can you adjust to make sure you get the experience you want from working under a particular leadership style?
Also, if you were to measure yourself against George's characteristics for authentic leadership (Purpose, Values, Relationships, Self-discipline, and Heart), where are you strongest and where do you come up short?
This was an interesting article I found on businessweek.com. This article describes the authors' views of why women are still being stereotyped in the workplace even with women's leadership programs in place. They believe that just having a women's program in existence is not enough. These programs need to be effective by communicating the right message and eliminating the stereotypes of women.
The first issue with the existing programs is the idea of exhibiting superwoman as the ultimate woman leader. As the example in the article states, the women who are characterized as top, successful leaders are those who emulate superwoman. This idea of a leader is unrealistic. Instead, women leaders need to be inspirational and motivational, according to the article. This idea is also mentioned in the Women and Leadership chapter in the textbook. The textbook states that women's styles tend to be more transformational than men's. Specifically, the inspirational motivation component of transformational leadership is linked to the statement in the article. This inspirational motivation component means that leaders communicate high expectations to followers and inspire them through motivation to become committed to and part of the shared vision in the organization.
I also thought it was interesting that the second issue with women's leadership programs is about the focus on the woes of women in leadership. It specifically mentions the glass ceiling and the double binds of family and work, which are both discussed in our textbook. These authors of the article state that these programs are focusing too much on the struggles and barriers of women in leadership, which ultimately leads to women fearing being successful and climbing to the top. Our textbook specifically describes the struggles women face from the glass ceiling, or labyrinth, and from maintaining a family and work. The labyrinth is the set of struggles and challenges women face along the way, not just near the top. Additionally, the textbook states that "women with children are more likely not to be employed or to work fewer hours than women without children..." This statement describes the work-home conflict that many women face in the workforce. These types of work-home conflicts can add a burden onto women who may be trying to climb the leadership ladder. Both the mention of the glass ceiling/labyrinth and the work-home conflict are mentioned in the textbook; however, they are are both mentioned in the article as focuses of why women are stereotyped in leadership.
Isn't it ironic that the possible attempt of spreading knowledge and information about the struggles women face in leadership is actually contributing to the stereotypes they face?
Maybe there is hope! In the last few years, it seems there have been more articles published about the unethical behavior of the executives of companies in the US. Finally, an article about businessman Albert Gordon and his genuine and exemplary behavior during his lifetime. The author of the article state numerous times that Gordon displayed integrity and honesty throughout his time at Kidder Peabody. It is stated that "his continued demonstration of a noble sense of purpose as a financier" was his most admirable accomplishment. That kind of behavior is almost unheard of in today's news.
Much of the information provided in the article relates to the topic of Authentic Leadership discussed in class. Authentic leadership mainly focuses on whether leadership is genuine and real. Gordon demonstrated intrapersonal authentic leadership during his time at Kidder Peabody. The textbook states that the intrapersonal perspective focuses on what goes on within the leader and that the leader relies heavily on their life story and the meaning attached to his or her life experiences. Gordon made sure to incorporate his own life experiences into his leadership. For example, when traveling, Gordon always sat in coach seats and took the subway or train as his means of transportation. This is not typical behavior for an a traveling businessman, who usually will sit in first class and travel by taxi or limousine. Intrapersonal authentic leaders also base their actions on their values. Gordon was a generous, yet quiet philanthropist, donating to many organizations over the years. Not only was Gordon an active philanthropist, but he was quiet about his donations. I believe this shows that Gordon donated to organizations because he truly wanted to help them, rather than just receiving recognition for doing so.
When reading my Fortune Magazine, I stumbled across this story and it intrigued me for my next blog. I found it extremely creative and innovative that one would identify a maestro as a leader. It's quite obvious that they display tremendous amount of leadership, it just seems to go ignored. Therefore, this story brings light to the integrity and various other leadership qualities that are present in scenarios like the one about to be described.
Alan Gilbert is the conductor for the New York Philharmonic. He started at a surprisingly young age at 44. In spite of his young age, Gilbert has won over critics, thanks in some measure to his skillful management of the 106 musicians who play for him. How does he do it?...
One characteristic of his leadership style that makes the entire team so successful is his openness to criticisms and suggestions. Gilbert argues that the musicians are experienced enough to know how the music should sound and encourages them to comment on his leadership style by providing feedback. He feels that this gives the followers a sense of ownership and responsibility in their performance. His constant strives towards success for the entire orchestra demonstrates his drive and passion for what he is doing. This mere concept enables the authentic leadership to emerge.
The developmental definition to authentic leadership helps to identify that his leadership style is a pattern of leader behavior that develops from various aspects of their lives including: self-awareness, internalized moral perspective, balanced processing, and relational transparency. Self-awareness is derived from Gilbert's' understanding that his success is contingent upon the success of his followers. This is reflected and rewarded through his unique style. The article even mentions that relationships are crucial..."connect with your customers -- and actually listen to them on occasion," this statement helps to conceptualize how self awareness can derive from communicating with customers and followers.
When Gilbert performs, he displays vital characteristics that are crucial elements when discussing authentic leadership. Some of these elements include: values, relationships, purpose, heart and self-discipline. Heart and relationships are the two most significant factors that come into play in Gilbert's leadership style. When conducting (especially 106 musicians!) it is crucial to "feel the music." Understand the sounds, tempo, rhythm and know how each individual fits into the entire puzzle of the orchestra...to understand such in-depth characteristics, one must have tremendous amounts of heart, at least to be truly authentic. This enables somebody like Gilbert to not just conduct, but to lead all of his followers to creating masterpieces that are enjoyed around the world! Relationships are also inevitably important in this scenario. One thing Gilbert believes is leaving the office door open. He actively works at being more accessible than his predecessors: "I actually think it's possible to get more out of the musicians by really showing them you know who they are and you identify with them and you trust them," he says. This element of trust exemplifies the importance placed on building relationships and communicating with his followers.
Overall, the leadership displayed by Alan Gilbert, is phenomenal. His constant strives towards learning and growing as a leader help to exemplify his overwhelming passion and love for his art. Furthermore, his constant abilities to build relationships and communicate with his followers illustrate the authenticity existent in his successful leaderships style.
The encounter displayed in the movie, “The Pursuit of Happyness,” is extremely relative to what is studied in our leadership course. The Pursuit of Happyness is a film about the on and off, homeless salesman (Chris Gardner) who turned into a stockbroker. It’s based on a true life story about a man fighting his way from struggles with his family, and his finances to the point of homelessness, and to eventually set up a brokerage firm. Chris had extreme hunger for success in his life, and it contributed to his persistence. He had lost everything in his life, and it was his hunger to get out of the rut that brought him to his eventual success.
In spite of Chris’ series of unfortunate events, he was raising a son. This was extremely difficult because children do not understand the extremities of homelessness and it remains difficult to maintain a positive image in life given the harsh realities that he faces.
Will Smith plays Chris Gardner in the movie. In the clip, we experience a motivational speech about possibility to his son. We as an audience can understand the struggle that Chris is facing because experiences in life constantly bring him down. It is difficult to remain positive and motivated in the midst of such failure. The critical part comes from the lesson learned in the speech.
The encounter displayed in the movie between actor Will Smith and his son, displays the situational approach to leadership. To elaborate, it is crucial to realize that Will Smith must analyze the level of development that his son is in. After this analysis it is critical to understand that the leader must react in ways that best fit the situation. At first, he begins by explaining that his son should not waste his time with basketball because he has no future in it. After the analysis, he completely backs away and says, "Don't ever let someone tell you, you can't do something. Not even me. You got a dream, you got to protect it. People can’t do something themselves, they want to tell you you can’t do it. You want something, go get it. Period." This “speech” exemplified the fact that the follower needed a motivation, morale and self-confidence boost. Ultimately these kinds of talks allow individuals to feel good about what it is they are pursuing, enabling success from practicing and hard work.
Leaders that engage in this type of behavior are infinitely important. What if Michael Jordan had listened to his high school basketball coach (after being cut from the team), instead of his father who encouraged him to follow his dreams? For every talented individual, there is a tremendous leader, bringing the best out of that individual.
As a leader, Chris learned something through his own statements, and in turn, helped his son learn a very valuable lesson. You must realize that who you have demonstrated up until today will have little to do with who you can become later on in life. You can fail your whole life and still turn it all around at any given time. As for people saying you can't do something because they can't do it themselves, it is vital to realize that they aren't you. Your own determination and integrity alone will help you overcome the limitations that they were never able to. When that time comes where you have achieved that goal you have set out to get, you will help those around you realize that perhaps it's also possible for them.
Words can be a powerful thing. As a leader, particularly utilizing the situational approach, know what to say, and when to say it.
Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. can be to many as one of the most inspirational leaders of all time. The civil rights movement would have most likely never been successful with out him. I would say MLK is a prime example of authentic leadership. This quote might help us understand the severity of what "negros" were facing at the time and still today; "But we refuse to believe that the bank of justice is bankrupt. We refuse to believe that there are insufficient funds in the great vaults of opportunity of this nation. And so we have come to cash this check, a check that will give us upon demand the riches of freedom and the security of justice.” What can we take from his statements that day which inspired millions and still will continue to inspire millions for years to come? It came from the heart. Authentic leaders are not afraid to challenge the status-quo that deters many of us from inspiring the people around us.
There were many leaders during the civil rights movement but to most of us, MLK is the only one that sticks out. Is that a coincidence or the way it's suppose to be? I believe it isn't. MLK won our hearts because he was original . What do you think about MLK? Is he a true subject of authentic leadership? Authentic leaders must portray various aspects to be considered an authentic leader; passion, compassion, consistency, connectedness, and behavior. I feel Dr. King possesses all of these traits but one that stands out to me is his drive of compassion. Compassion equates to heart. Dr. King had a heart bigger than the Grinch from the Grinch that Stole Christmas, and his heart changed millions and the way our society knows and functions today!
Adolf Hitler can be regarded as one of the worst human beings born of all time, but why do we hate him so much? That question is pretty straight forward and might stir up a great deal of controversy but overall the general answer can be simply summed up as "he killed millions of innocent people." What led him to get in this position of power? It's because he was able to lead millions of people to follow him.
I think Hitler is the perfect example of a transformational leader. A transformational leader creates a vision for his followers. This is exactly what Adolf did. He created his vision of domination throughout the world. At first all of Germany thought he was a great country icon, but what happened that led the entire world to hate him? Hitler will never go down in history as a great man or icon because of his actions, but at the time many would have begged to differ. He instilled a key part of transformational leadership style, building trust in others. This trust led the German regime to be one of the most hated countries in the world at that time. I bet now that thought WWII still lingers in Germans today. What do you think? I know this is a very controversial topic, so please keep in mind the millions of lives that were lost to this socially deranged man.
If you have been living in a cave for the past couple years, you might not have heard about Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg but for the majority of us Zuckerberg is a easily recognizable name. What about Zuckerberg makes him so great? Is it because he built a billion dollar empire? Is it because he changed the way people interact across the globe? No, Zuckerberg is great because throughout his short lived life he never gave up on his dream; connecting people through social interaction. In this TIME magazine article (http://www.time.com/time/specials/packages/article/0,28804,2036683_2037183,00.html) TIME votes him the 2010 man of the year. You can't be the man of the year without being a great leader.
Zuckerberg's leadership style has been in question and will be in question as Facebook prepares to switch its funding to IPO. I believe Zuckerberg is a perfect example of path-goal theory. Path-goal leaders as we know, need to adapt their style to one that allows their subordinates to achieve a specific goal.
This can be done by being directive, supportive, participated, and achievement oriented. Zuckerberg fits all criteria. Throughout the growth and development of Facebook he has changed his style to continuously achieve their overall goal. To start he began the company as a directive leader; providing guidance and instilling the psychological structure that the company needed in order to have constant expansion. It is hard to convey an idea to another, especially if it is one that could change the way society operated. Once Zuckerberg set the foundation of psychological structure, he could sit back and play a more supportive role. Being supportative allows for the vision of Facebook to take hold. Currently though Zuckerberg is the best demonstrator of a participative style. Facebook is now self sustaining and doesn't need a hard-nosed leader under its ranks. The best way we can see this style of leadership in action is through his own Facebook page. He is currently promoting the need for driven individuals such as himself to work for the company.
Any thoughts on Zuckerberg? I know there has got to be a lot of input since his company is now the most visited page in the US over Gooogle!
Jeff Beznos started Amazon as an online bookstore back in 1994. He applied his leadership style and helped turn this online new entrant and turn it into the single largest retailer on the web.
Beznos discusses the importance of a long term vision. He continues by stressing the importance of keeping your head up through failure and learning to be misunderstood before reaching success.
Another firm belief that Mr. Beznos applies to Amazon is his customer-focus orientation. This allows Amazon to embed a culture that shows customer and employee appreciation.
No doubt Beznos is a tremendous leader, for being a true Internet pioneer, but there is a specific theory that relates to Beznos' leadership. The applied theory, in this case, is Transformational Leadership.
In this given scenario, a man created an incredibly successful company that exists electronically. The change agent occurred when consumers initially heard of purchasing items over the Internet, it was ludicrous. Now-a-days, its simple, quick and extremely efficient. Needless to say, millions of consumers hesitant to utilize an online retailer have had attitude and emotional changes that helped create the success of Amazon.
Jeff Beznos leads subordinates at Amazon by continually raising level of motivation and morality. One key part of success for Amazon has been the tremendous amount of innovation. This is a direct result of Jeff's leadership style. "While we're crossing the desert, we may be thirsty, but we sincerely believe there's an oasis on the other side." This quote from Jeff Beznos helps to explain the concepts he applies to his organization. He boosts motivation in his followers by utilizing hope that the new risky ventures the company is participating in, will have great rewards and ultimately lead to profitability and growth.
Furthermore, Beznos demonstrates an extreme desire to influence in that he is open to ideas, questions, comments and concerns of followers and workers alike. "One piece of the culture here that is true of my personality is that I have never believed that you couldn't be serious and have fun at the same time. It's perhaps most important to have fun when stumbling." This quote illustrates Beznos' opinion in embedding customer and employee focus on the company culture and explains that it is important and crucial for long term success. This helps to explain his belief in similarity between the leader and the follower.
Having a strong focus on relationships and their development will lead to success because followers/employees will feel needed and will be more driven towards success. This leadership style has proven successful through Amazon's success and if the transformational theory remains intact, the company will continue to grow and produce profits, while maintaining a satisfied customer and employee base.
What do you all think about his leadership style? Is it effective?
Dean Kamen, inventor of the Segway, is also the founder of a program called FIRST (For Inspiration and Recognition of Science and Technology). This is a program that is attempting to change the culture of the United States through exposing kids from elementary school through high school to math and science through robotics. I participated in this program in high school and it's still something I participate in as a mentor.
Dean Kamen is the textbook definition of a transformational leader. Through getting kids excited about STEM careers (Science, Technology, Engineering and Math), Kamen is working to change the culture of the U.S. to celebrate these areas instead of traditional sports and celebrities. Kamen created this program to spread the message that we get the best of what we celebrate. Meaning that if people think something is worthwhile and want the reward associated with it, they will compete and therefore produce a better overall output. Instead of celebrating sports, Kamen wants to celebrate kids making robots.
Through this program Kamen has the ability to inspire and motivate others to create a change in the culture of the U.S.. Kamen engages students with a different challenge every year, typically a game played with 6 robots (3v3). Kids then have 6 weeks to design, build and complete a robot, with the help of engineers and other professionals, that is about 5 ft. tall weighing up to 120 lbs.. Kamen uses the creation of robots as a tool for intellectual stimulation of the students. Through the different facets of each robotics team, Kamen is able to reach and fulfill a consideration for the needs of every student participating. From tasks such as programming, scouting, designing and manufacturing, each student has a place on the team.
While Kamen may not be the most charismatic man you will ever see (he always dresses in full out denim), he sure has found a great way to inspire youth to get excited about science and technology. By creating something that is somewhat similar to a sport, Kamen has built an excitement that started in 1992 with only 28 teams in a New Hampshire high school gym that now reaches over 250,000 kids that get to compete at the end of the season on the floor of the Georgia Dome in Atlanta. Playing in this type of atmosphere helps to inspire the students and motivate them to do great things. If this isn't an example of inspiring a change and transforming a culture, I don't know what is.
Compared to transformational leaders like Kamen, what leaders can you think of that would fit in other Leadership types such as Transactional Leadership and Laissez-Faire Leadership?
September 11, 2001 is a day that most people remember as being one of the worst terrorist attacks that hit our nation. In the midst of such a tragedy, businesses everywhere were significantly impacted. The most impacted was the airline industry.
Southwest is known for their customer service. In an industry fraught with awful customer service, Southwest distanced itself from other airlines by putting the customer first, no matter what the situation.
On September 11, 2001, airlines were forced to shut down for days while the rest of the nation recovered from the terrorist attacks. This meant that all airline passengers, flight attendants and pilots were stranded with the planes across the country. Instead of merely sitting and waiting, Southwest employees were encouraged to take passengers bowling or to the movies to pass the time.
Many airlines started cutting jobs in the months following 9/11. The airline industry had been badly damaged, and many airlines were forced to cut their workforce by up to 20%. Instead of following the trend, Southwest made an announcement only three days after 9/11 that Southwest would be keeping all of their employees and starting a $179.8 million profit sharing payment to employees.
Southwest CEO James Parker believed that because Southwest had built their company on sound business principles for the past 30 years, they were able to handle crisis better than other airlines.
James Parker demonstrates many aspects of the contingency model in his leadership style.The first and foremost important factor is that there is a situational influence that determines the leadership methods that are to be implemented.Mr. Parker has Good leader-member relations, is influenced by a degree of task structure and definitely displays tremendous amounts of power in his leadership.
These three factors characterize the type of leadership that should follow the situation at hand.And, due to the given scenario, Parker remains extremely customer and employee focused and demonstrates this focus by implementing programs in favor of the employees and customers.
Ultimately, the company may be less profitable in the short-term, but due to the significant impact Parker’s leadership style has on the company and followers, Southwest Airlines has adopted an infinitely important reputation of customer and employee focus.
What do you all think?Is the contingency theory well represented in this example?What other theories can you justify for Parker and Southwest Airlines?
In this article from the Wall Street Journal, one journalist gives his opinion on whether Executive Bonuses should exist today. He believes that companies should scrap the whole idea of the cash bonuses, mainly because of the corrupt history they have created in the past. This journalist has many reasons why he believes that Executives should not receive cash bonuses and also states the false assumptions of companies. He believes Executive Bonuses represent the most prominent form of legal corruption and that they are bringing down the global economy.
After reading this article, I realized that much of what this journalist was saying related to the chapter in our book about leadership ethics. The chapter is not about a leadership ethics theory, per se, but it does provide a guide to some of the ethical issues that can arise in leadership situations. According to the book, "ethics is concerned with the kinds of values and morals an individual or society finds desirable or appropriate" (378). Concerning leadership, ethics has to do with what leaders do and who leaders are.The article states that executives should not receive bonuses for several reasons, many of which have to do with the ethics behind it. It seems as though the executives that are describes are exhibiting characteristics of ethical egoism. Ethical egoism is when a person acts to create the greatest good for herself or himself (379). The article states that executives collect bonuses even when it just appears as if they are winning, even when they lose, just for drawing cards, and even just for sticking with it and staying with the company. All of these actions demonstrate that these executives are not doing anything for others, but making sure that they receive a bonus, whether or not they really deserve one or not. The article states that, "This may be nice work if you can get it, but it is awful work if you care about the sustainability of an enterprise." And this just shows that executives that receive bonuses aren't really interested in keeping the company around for a long time, as long as the bonus benefits themselves right now.
Additionally, I believe this article relates to the influence dimension of ethics as well. The influence dimension of leadership requires that the leader have an impact on the lives of those being led (382). And, since the leaders have more power, they have more responsibility to be conscious of how their leadership affects followers' lives. The article states that the executives that receive bonuses are more like gamblers than leaders; directly relating to the influence dimension. Executives are acting like gamblers, but they are playing with other peoples' money. As an executive of a company, you are responsible for the stockholders' money as well as the livelihood of the employees and the sustainability of the company.Therefore, executives that take the cash bonus are not exhibiting the influence dimension in a positive way.
After reading the article and my blog post, do you think executives receiving bonuses is ethical? If so, can you argue against what I stated above?
This article from the Huffington Post describes the risks that the women of the Middle East have taken in the last few months but are still not always recognized or treated fairly.
Recently, women celebrated the 100th anniversary of International Women's Day in Egypt. Despite marking a celebrated 100 years, they came across male hecklers who shouted at them to go home "where they belong". However, some can argue that the revolutions in the Middle East never would have happened without the women, that they were the brains behind the slogans, the marches, and that they were the true activists. Yet, they are not receiving the recognition or treatment that they deserve.
The Middle East has a long history of the mistreatment of women. Many countries in the Middle East do not see women as equals. However, as we learned in class, women are equally effective leaders (303). Also, the book states that women were proven to be more effective than man were in education, government, and social services organizations. But, the article describes Iraqi women's struggles to find equality in filling the seats of parliament, despite being promised that women would fill an equal amount of seats.
Women of the Middle East seem to be struggling with issues that are considered under the leadership labyrinth described in the book. As I stated above, some of the men shouted at the women to go back home "where they belong." This confrontation falls under the Human Capital section of the leadership labyrinth. The Human Capital section talks about the work-home conflict that many women face. For many, many years, women have been expected to work in the home. And in recent years, women have been diving further into the workforce, but are still expected to do all of the work in the home.Women in the Middle East are perceived to take a backseat when it comes to leadership because it is thought that they do not belong there.
Additionally, the issues women are facing in the Middle East fall under the Prejudice section of the labyrinth as well. Despite contributing tremendous efforts to the revolutions in the Middle East, the women are still not receiving equal treatment. This might be because of the prejudice that women are facing because of the stereotypic beliefs about how women ought to be. The book states that "gender stereotypes are pervasive, well documented, and highly resistant to change" (311). This means that even though women played a huge part in the recent revolutions, they are not going to see change in the perception of women because they are so ingrained in the culture of those countries. The unequal and unfair treatment of women will not change significantly from these revolutions because gender stereotypes are so resistant to change.
After reading this article and my interpretation of the situation, what are your thoughts on how women in the Middle East should be navigating the labyrinth? What should the women be doing to overcome these issues? Do you think any additional sections or attributes of the leadership labyrinth are present?
This article looks at the leadership style in the "frat boy" culture of the Tribune Company and how effective that style is when promoting change.
After reading this article, the first theory that came to mind was the Leader-Member Exchange (LMX) Theory. The LMX theory takes into account the dyadic relationship and interactions between the leader and followers. It also looks at the relationship that the leader has between each individual follower, as opposed to the relationship with the collective group. Sam Zell, owner of the Tribune Company, allowed his executive team to build a "fun, non-linear creative environment." He didn't care about job candidates with "solid newsroom experience", and he encouraged candidates who were "anti-establishment". The type of culture he created consisted of people just like him, and was almost clique-like. Everyone within the company that had the same "frat culture" view as Zell was in the in-group. They were encouraged and empowered more and had a higher quality relationship with Zell than the followers in the out-group. The out-group doesn't have the same kind of relationship or compatibility with the leader, but Zell could have used this to his advantage by encouraging their feedback and ideas. What Zell needed were people who would challenge his process, but since he only had people like him in executive and other top-level positions, all he got from them was agreement. Zell did a lot of talking about change, but didn't approach change in the right way. He spent time trashing what had been done in the past, instead of using those mistakes to get followers excited for the changes that would happen in the future.
I also thought about the Contingency theory while reading this article. The Contingency theory matches leaders to the situation and is contingent on matching the leader's style to the right setting. Based of the Contingency Model, the culture that Zell created had good leader-member relations because the followers trusted and were confident in him and were loyal to him. There was low task structure because the requirements were not clearly spelled out. Zell believed in having a "fun" environment rather than a structured environment. In this situation, there was strong position power because Zell was the owner if the Tribune Company, so he was the person that everyone needed to make sure was satisfied. The preferred leadership style for good leader-member relations, low task structure, and high position power would be middle or low LPC's. Based on the outcome of Zell's leadership, it looks like there was a mismatch. I believe that there was a mismatch with Zell's style and the situation because the Tribune Company failed under Zell's leadership withing a year of him purchasing it, and went bankrupt in that time as well.
According to an article on Yahoo!, some of the most famous celebrities have taken a stand against President Obama's recent decision to no longer legally defend the Defense of Marriage act. Some celebrities such as Anne Hathaway, Martin Sheen, Ellen Degeneres, and Jane Lynch have signed a letter asking Obama to legalize same-sex marriage. Although these celebrities may not fit the typical demographic for the leaders we have been talking about, I believe taking a strong stand on such a controversial subject exhibits leadership.
I think that these celebrities are exhibiting characteristics of Authentic Leadership through their genuine approach to the situation. These 'A-listers' are exhibiting characteristics of the Intrapersonal definition stated in the textbook. Their strong stance on same-sex marriage incorporates their self knowledge and they are basing their actions on their values. Their values include equality to same-sex couples and their letter to the President exhibits these beliefs. The celebrities are leading from conviction because they have a strong, fixed belief in their opinion on same-sex marriage.
I believe that Authentic Leadership really comes through in people during situations that have been considered controversial over the years, such as legalizing same-sex marriage and abortion. Many of the leaders' actions that come from these types of situations are based on the core values of the leader.
I also believe that these stars are hoping that their legitimate power will play a part in influencing others to join the cause. Their legitimate power comes from having status. Many celebrities use their status and popularity to influence others because they are looked up to by many.
I will again be using an example from one of my other classes as I find them highly interesting. Ray Anderson founded Interface, a module carpet company (using smaller squares of carpet instead of large rolls), in 1973 and has since turned it into a $1,000,000,000+ company. However at a certain point in his career, 1995 to be more specific, his company started to run into questions from consumers about what his company was doing for the environment. He didn't have answers at that point and it caused a big problem. Eventually he wound up reading a book title the Ecology of Commerce and after doing so, felt called to make a change.
Interface now has a company goal to reach a level of zero waste by 2020 but they are well ahead of the pace in reaching that goal. Anderson had a tough decision to make, and he chose the hard road but the one that was more worthwhile. Anderson now spends much of his time helping other companies change their practices and become sustainable. He exercises both an expert power, gained through his experience, and demonstrates the use of path goal theory with his followers (other companies wishing to go green). They have a set goal (being sustainable) and he is able to help them through consulting (providing support, removing obstacles and clarifying the path) to reach that goal. He has decided to help others through a position he was once in himself and it's helping to make the world a better place.
What other kinds of leadership might Anderson be using in this example that I might have missed? I feel that several are usually applicable, but that it can be easy to miss others once you have chosen one or two.
In this post, I want to focus on the leader we all know about, but might not think about; Michael Jackson. Michael Jackson or the king of pop, has seen decades of success in the entertainment industry, but many of us over look the fact that he inspired millions of dedicated fans. A true leader is what I would describe Michael as. Many of us stigmatize Michael in a bad way for his not so kosher acts such as changing race, but no matter how hard we hate on him we all will try to replicate his famous moon walk to Billie Jean the instant the song is played. Is this a coincidence or just traits of a born leader? I believe Michael has had this talent all along.
With the release of his post death movie, This is It, we see Michael as nothing but a hard driven inspirational leader to all those surrounded by him. By using Peter Northouse's situational approach theory comprised of four parts (directing, coaching, supporting, and delegating) we can see how he utilized a few aspect to the fullest. First, being a solo music artist makes Michael very directing towards his co-workers. His tour is one of the largest selling of all time. How did it get this way? By directing his staff to understand the underlying goal of his tour; Perfection= Success. His direction to push his staff to settle for nothing but the best is what made Michael's career so successful.
Following up with Northouse's theory, Jackson is a great coach to the people around him. As the saying goes, "practice makes perfect" fits excellently in this situation. Though his staff might have lacked the born traits of a pop icon, they we're continuously coached by Michael through constant motivation and supportive behavior to keep pushing. Overall, I think it paid off. There might not be another Michael Jackson ever to come around our time, but to know that we all we're in presence of greatness in the making shows that without his leadership it could have been nothing at all.
What are your thoughts on Michael? Is he a perfect example of a natural born leader or not?
President Barack Obama is the first Generation X-er to be elected President. He is currently working with a team of both Generation X and Boomers, which may be a source of conflict depending on his leadership style. Considering the variety of generations in the White House, Obama will have to adjust his style depending on his followers.
Baby Boomers are generally thought of as more traditional and resistant to change, while Generation X is known more for their desire for challenges and new opportunities. When looking at the Path-Goal Theory, Obama would need to be more have a more Supportive style with the Boomers, because they are more traditional and aren't looking for someone to direct them and tell them what to do. With Gen X, he would need to have a more Achievement-oriented style, because they look for challenges and have a higher need to excel. Assuming that Obama is able to change his leadership style depending on the needs of his followers, he has a stronger possibility of being a successful leader to his followers and reaching whatever goals they set.
Jim Goodnight is arguably one of the best corporate leaders of all time. SAS Institute was ranked #1 Best companies to work for, for the second year in a row this year. This is all thanks to Mr. Goodnights tremendous leadership style.
One thing I have noticed is that Jim Goodnight utilizes the situational approach. This is evidenced through his ability to ignore the situation and focus solely on the followers (his subordinates). I would argue that Goodnight does not change his style based on the levels of the followers, so in that sense, he wouldn't be classified in the situational approach. I happen to believe that Goodnight treats every employee the exact same, respectable way. For those unfamiliar with his beliefs, Goodnight creates an employee-friendly environment. He insisted that workers not only get individual offices, but also break rooms stocked with free refreshments, on-site gymnasiums and day care centers, and a team of company physicians and nurses. (Not to mention a remarkable on site cafeteria and masseuse!)
If you were to apply the leadership grid from the style approach to Mr. Goodnights' leadership approach, it becomes evident that he would be country-club management. Through his stern beliefs in creating an ultimate environment for the employees, one can clearly tell that he uses his leadership to address the people opposed to results. This is important because he feels that building interpersonal relationships, while deemphasizing production, individuals will be excited to come to work and contribute to a positive atmosphere, which will in turn lead to success for the company in the long run.
What other theories of leadership do you see emergent in Jim Goodnights approach?
For more information, check out the link!
http://knowledge.wharton.upenn.edu/article.cfm?articleid=2660
This article summarizes the campaign called "Let's Move!" started by first lady Michelle Obama. The campaign is meant to fight childhood obesity in the U.S. and get kids moving and eating healthy. I think that Michelle Obama demonstrates strong leadership characteristics by implementing this campaign. Mrs. Obama was able to see an issue that was quickly arising and made an effort to create change. Childhood obesity has been an ongoing issue for the last several years, but Michelle Obama is one of few trying to create a change effort. Instead of just reporting the facts about childhood obesity, she has created a plan to actually change and do something about the rising issue at hand.
I would say Mrs. Obama is demonstrating characteristics of the Path-Goal theory. She is motivating her followers (kids and families) to accomplish designated goals. She is trying to make the path to being healthy clear and easy by coaching and directing kids by educating them about making healthy choices when it comes to proper nutrition. Additionally, she is removing obstacles and roadblocks by working with food and beverage companies to lower their sugar and fat content and working with schools to provide healthy lunch options. Within the Path-Goal Theory, I believe Michelle Obama demonstrates two of the four leader behaviors (directive, supportive, participative, achievement-oriented). I believe that Obama demonstrates characteristics of a supportive leader, which entails being friendly and approachable, and attending to the well being of human needs. In order to promote the campaign, Obama has taken a friendly approach to reach out to the kids of America. The Let's Move website is very user friendly, allowing easy access and attainability. The facts presented to the kids, as well as their parents, is not overwhelming or complicated, giving Obama a an approachable feel. Additionally, this entire campaign demonstrates her concern for the well being of kids, following the characteristic listed in the supportive leader behavior. I also believe that Michelle Obama demonstrates an achievement-oriented leader behavior as well, which is described as the leader challenging their subordinates to perform work at their highest level possible. The Let's Move campaign is all about challenging kids to lead a healthy lifestyle and making the most out of their lives.
Do you think Obama becoming a directive leader will make the Let's Move campaign more effective? Also, Are there any suggestions you would make to Mrs. Obama if you could?
(Posted by: Kelly Yuen)
This is an article I have from a different class that takes a good look at a well known green architect, William McDonough, and talks about his role in the development of the green revolution.
I found it interesting, not only because of the content and the info about McDonough, but also because of how he has taken on a challenge. He recognized an area that needed change and found a way to make a change, and from what is written, it's pretty obvious that he's had a significant impact in what he's done. The main type of leadership he exemplifies is that of Expert power from his knowledge of how to create and design green buildings and use his abilities to create the change he wants to see in the world. While he may not be a highly visible leader, he is one that leads through his actions and through the projects he takes on as an architect.
I really liked this article because it focused on a person that wanted something to change, and did what was necessary to make that change.
So, I was reading through my Fortune Magazine today and thought: "Why not use a story of an influencer possessing leadership, that was used for bad?"
I find it quite interesting to hear stories of individuals with so much potential, who wash it away through illegal or unethical acts. This specific story is about a man named Tobechi Onwuhara.
To give a brief summary as to what happened, Tobechi lead a group of (7 or 8) individuals through an ongoing heist. This "crew" manipulated databases and lenders to siphon millions out of the accounts of homeowners using merely cell phones and internet connection. Through the course of 3 years, it was determined that he stole $44 million, according to the FBI (They believe the actual total may be between $80-$100 million).
Clearly the fraud that took place requires significant amounts of intelligence, or, to say the least, technological "savy-ness." This means that Onwuhara posseses impressive skill sets that most would envy. In addition to the massive amounts of skill sets required to pull of such a large scale heist, Tobechi also possesses leadership techniques that are vital for successful leadership. The biggest feature being motivation. He lead a group of people to engage in illegal activity, fully aware of the consequences!
He was no doubt a powerful leader, but it's a shame that his leadership was used to do negative things. With an individual with so much potential, it makes you wonder, "What if he had used this leadership for a worthy cause?"
For more information check out the link from the following source:
O'Brien, Luke. "Tobechi Onwuhara: King of home equity fraud - Full version - Jan. 25, 2011." Business, financial, personal finance news - CNNMoney.com. N.p., n.d. Web. 8 Feb. 2011. <http://money.cnn.com/2011/01/24/real_estate/onwuhara_home_equity_fraud_full.fortune/index.htm>
The idea of a company having two CEO's seems unrealistic and difficult to successfully pull off, but for retailer Aeropostale, this is what they are convinced is going to work. Aeropostale's former CEO, Julian Geiger, stepped down at the end of 2010, and was replaced by president, Mindy Meads and COO, Thomas Johnson. This is an extremely risky decision for the company to make, considering the result that came from others with co-CEO's, such as Goldman Sachs and Martha Stewart Living Omnimedia. Meads and Johnson are said to work well together, but a situation that puts them both in the same position of leadership and power will test their leadership abilities.
As long as their egos don't get the best of them, and Meads and Johnson can maintain consistent behaviors in their leadership styles, the co-CEO situation could be a success for the company. They must lead together, as a team, instead of for only for themselves, individually. Their leadership and the decisions that they make should be seamless, and they must have confidence in themselves and in one another to be successful and to ensure that their team/followers are actually willing to follow them.
