3/23/11
3/12/11
Transformational Leadership
James McGregor Burns was one of the first theorists to take a philosophical approach to the notion of leadership. He described the process of transformational leadership as one that changes and transforms individuals, while frequently incorporating a charismatic and visionary leadership style. This type of leadership encourages followers to go beyond their expectations and shoot for goals they once thought were unattainable. By taking this attitude, leaders are raising the levels of morality in their subordinates as well as their own.
Burns stated that transformational leadership “occurs when one or more persons engage with others in such a way that leaders and followers raise one another to higher levels of motivation and morality.” By a way of interaction, transformational leadership creates a two-way learning process from which both leaders and followers benefit from, resulting in a progression of the morality and motivation of the individuals.
Remember the Titans:
Slideshow:
Burns stated that transformational leadership “occurs when one or more persons engage with others in such a way that leaders and followers raise one another to higher levels of motivation and morality.” By a way of interaction, transformational leadership creates a two-way learning process from which both leaders and followers benefit from, resulting in a progression of the morality and motivation of the individuals.
Remember the Titans:
Slideshow:
3/5/11
Blanchard's Situational Leadership Model
Blanchard's
Situational Leadership Theory developed assumes that leaders should adapt their strategies according to the maturity levels of their subordinates. There are four leadership styles, S1 – S4, and four development levels, D1 – D4. There is a match between the leadership styles and the development levels. The theory suggests that leaders should put less or greater emphasis on the task/relationship according to the development level of the individual.
The leader must be careful in selecting the leadership style because a mismatch could cause a destructive situation for the relationship as people’s need vary depending on their maturity level.
Situational Leadership Theory developed assumes that leaders should adapt their strategies according to the maturity levels of their subordinates. There are four leadership styles, S1 – S4, and four development levels, D1 – D4. There is a match between the leadership styles and the development levels. The theory suggests that leaders should put less or greater emphasis on the task/relationship according to the development level of the individual.
The leader must be careful in selecting the leadership style because a mismatch could cause a destructive situation for the relationship as people’s need vary depending on their maturity level.
Situational VS Contingency
Situational Theory
The Situational Leadership theory was created by Kenneth Blanchard and Paul Hersey. This theory suggests that one should use not only his/her management style, but also, manage according to the situation, hence the name, Situational theory. The maturity levels of the employees needs to be kept in mind while using this theory. The four leadership styles associated with this theory are classified as:
1. high task-low relationship (telling);
2. high task-high relationship (selling);
3. low task-high relationship (participating);
4. low task-low relationship (delegating).
Task behavior relates to telling people what to do, how to do it, when to do it, and where to do it, all while indicating very low relationship between parts. Relationship behavior resembles a two-way communication in which both parts actively participate, giving feedback, encouragement and coaching.
The theory suggests that the readiness or maturity of a person is key when deciding which style to used. By readiness or maturity, the theory refers to the levels of confidence, ability and willingness of that person or group.
This theory identifies the maturity level of the follower, which it categorizes as:
M1. They generally lack the specific skills required for the job in hand and are unable and unwilling to do or to take responsibility for this job or task.
M2. They are still unable to take on responsibility for the task being done; however, they are willing to work at the task.
M3. They are experienced and able to do the task but lack the confidence to take on responsibility.
M4. They are experienced at the task, and comfortable with their own ability to do it well. They are able and willing to not only do the task, but to take responsibility for the task.
To describe a situation in which the situational theory is applied, the example of a surgeon in the operating room provides a quick explanation. The surgeon is an expert in surgery and in leading the team, but according to the condition of the patient, he/she will have to make quick decisions depending on the condition of the patient.
Fiedler’s Contingency Theory
Fred Fiedler argued that the leader’s effectiveness resulted from the interaction of leadership style and situational favorableness. The theory describes two types of leaders: those who accomplish by developing good relationships with the group, and those who concentrate primarily on the task. Fiedler defended that there are no ideal leaders, stating that both leaders can be effective as long as the orientation fits the situation.
In a workplace, this could be exemplified by a management team that is constantly trying to adapt to the new team members. The inability for the management team to adapt to the new staff will result in a higher turnover rate, which means a need for a change.
The Situational Leadership theory was created by Kenneth Blanchard and Paul Hersey. This theory suggests that one should use not only his/her management style, but also, manage according to the situation, hence the name, Situational theory. The maturity levels of the employees needs to be kept in mind while using this theory. The four leadership styles associated with this theory are classified as:
1. high task-low relationship (telling);
2. high task-high relationship (selling);
3. low task-high relationship (participating);
4. low task-low relationship (delegating).
Task behavior relates to telling people what to do, how to do it, when to do it, and where to do it, all while indicating very low relationship between parts. Relationship behavior resembles a two-way communication in which both parts actively participate, giving feedback, encouragement and coaching.
The theory suggests that the readiness or maturity of a person is key when deciding which style to used. By readiness or maturity, the theory refers to the levels of confidence, ability and willingness of that person or group.
This theory identifies the maturity level of the follower, which it categorizes as:
M1. They generally lack the specific skills required for the job in hand and are unable and unwilling to do or to take responsibility for this job or task.
M2. They are still unable to take on responsibility for the task being done; however, they are willing to work at the task.
M3. They are experienced and able to do the task but lack the confidence to take on responsibility.
M4. They are experienced at the task, and comfortable with their own ability to do it well. They are able and willing to not only do the task, but to take responsibility for the task.
To describe a situation in which the situational theory is applied, the example of a surgeon in the operating room provides a quick explanation. The surgeon is an expert in surgery and in leading the team, but according to the condition of the patient, he/she will have to make quick decisions depending on the condition of the patient.
Fiedler’s Contingency Theory
Fred Fiedler argued that the leader’s effectiveness resulted from the interaction of leadership style and situational favorableness. The theory describes two types of leaders: those who accomplish by developing good relationships with the group, and those who concentrate primarily on the task. Fiedler defended that there are no ideal leaders, stating that both leaders can be effective as long as the orientation fits the situation.
In a workplace, this could be exemplified by a management team that is constantly trying to adapt to the new team members. The inability for the management team to adapt to the new staff will result in a higher turnover rate, which means a need for a change.
Who’s Similar and who’s not?!
After reading my classmates’ blogs, I found that the person that came closer in his archetypes was Shilo. He scored the highest on Lover and Sage, and lowest on Destroyer and Orphan. This explains the reason why we have several thoughts in common, which I realized after reading his blog more thoroughly. I have taken classes with Shilo in the past and worked in group projects with him and we got along pretty well, so to find out this similarities on our archetypes doesn’t surprise me.
This one took a while to find, but after a good amount of time reviewing other people’s blogs, I found that Dan is having an absolute blast with the whole blogging thing. I mean he has a post for almost every day, and come on, that Old School Hit of the Day is hilarious. I think its great he is putting that much enthusiasm on it. And this is where we differ the most. I don’t think there are completely different opinions, so I decided to pick on Dan’s blog because it seemed to be totally different than mine, and he worked hard to make his blog so funny. I think though, if you don’t follow it or spend a good amount at a time reading it gets pretty confusing. Keep up the good work mateyyyyy!
This one took a while to find, but after a good amount of time reviewing other people’s blogs, I found that Dan is having an absolute blast with the whole blogging thing. I mean he has a post for almost every day, and come on, that Old School Hit of the Day is hilarious. I think its great he is putting that much enthusiasm on it. And this is where we differ the most. I don’t think there are completely different opinions, so I decided to pick on Dan’s blog because it seemed to be totally different than mine, and he worked hard to make his blog so funny. I think though, if you don’t follow it or spend a good amount at a time reading it gets pretty confusing. Keep up the good work mateyyyyy!
PMAI...
PMAI Assessment…
According to the Pearson-Marr Archetype Indicator I scored higher on Lover, Sage, and Ruler. Also, the quality I scored the lowest was the Orphan.
As a Lover, at my best, I am sensuous, alive, vital, and full of love to others and for life. I would prefer to be passionately in love with someone who returns my affections. I many want to guard against the tendency to be promiscuous or inappropriate. As a leader, I am passionate, charismatic, and intense.
The Sage archetype tells me that not only I am knowledgeable but wise, and I strive to be as objective and fair as possible while trying to eliminate any biases. I am motivated by a genuine hunger for truth. The Sage’s tendency to be dogmatic and opinionated about the efforts of others can take a negative turn. As a leader, I could be excellent at dispassionate analysis, planning, evaluation and making well planned decisions.
Like the good King, the Ruler in myself tells me to step up and take control when things are in disarray, and reign for the good of those who follow me. For the Ruler, I need to be aware of the tendency to take advantage of the entitlement of my status and become a dictator. As a leader, I am good at putting structures, policies and procedures in place that make life easier and more efficient.
I agree with the results of this assessment, except for my lowest score, the Orphan. I scored higher on the Lover and Sage archetypes, and that reflects my leadership characteristics. As a leader, if I love my work, I am passionate, charismatic and intense, making well-planned decisions as a result of careful analysis and evaluations. I think the score on the Orphan archetype does not necessarily reflect my characteristics because I tend to be very realistic in what can or cannot be accomplished.
I think these tests come very handy I a way for people to learn about their strengths and weaknesses, and also to make them aware of their negative behaviors.
According to the Pearson-Marr Archetype Indicator I scored higher on Lover, Sage, and Ruler. Also, the quality I scored the lowest was the Orphan.
As a Lover, at my best, I am sensuous, alive, vital, and full of love to others and for life. I would prefer to be passionately in love with someone who returns my affections. I many want to guard against the tendency to be promiscuous or inappropriate. As a leader, I am passionate, charismatic, and intense.
The Sage archetype tells me that not only I am knowledgeable but wise, and I strive to be as objective and fair as possible while trying to eliminate any biases. I am motivated by a genuine hunger for truth. The Sage’s tendency to be dogmatic and opinionated about the efforts of others can take a negative turn. As a leader, I could be excellent at dispassionate analysis, planning, evaluation and making well planned decisions.
Like the good King, the Ruler in myself tells me to step up and take control when things are in disarray, and reign for the good of those who follow me. For the Ruler, I need to be aware of the tendency to take advantage of the entitlement of my status and become a dictator. As a leader, I am good at putting structures, policies and procedures in place that make life easier and more efficient.
I agree with the results of this assessment, except for my lowest score, the Orphan. I scored higher on the Lover and Sage archetypes, and that reflects my leadership characteristics. As a leader, if I love my work, I am passionate, charismatic and intense, making well-planned decisions as a result of careful analysis and evaluations. I think the score on the Orphan archetype does not necessarily reflect my characteristics because I tend to be very realistic in what can or cannot be accomplished.
I think these tests come very handy I a way for people to learn about their strengths and weaknesses, and also to make them aware of their negative behaviors.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)