Choose one peer; provide insight to this individual based on the chapter reading; what might be helpful in his/her situation?
Part 1– Our employees are our internal customers. Refer to the Kano Model (Figure 16) in Chapter 6.
As a follower, please identify one of your current or former leaders in the workplace.
a) Discuss the satisfactionand performancedimensions for this leader regarding his/her followers.
b) Discuss the behaviors, relationships, systems, and processes that contributed to (or diminished) the excitement curve for that leaders unit of accountability (i.e., dept., team, functional area, etc.).
c) Discuss potential improvements to the excitement curve based on leadership research (not just your opinions).
Part 2 – Go to Self-Assessments and click on the Dan Goleman leadership assessment; take the assessment.
a) After completing the assessment and reading about the 6 styles (pdf), discuss your dominant leadership style (s). How might your style contribute to (detract from) the ‘excitement curve’ (see Kano Model) in the current COVID environment (i.e., situational leadership)?
b) What might you do to ‘flex your style’ and create positive deviations in employee delight (i.e., exceed expectations)?
c) Which elements of the 6 styles do you need to adopt? Which style elements are not helping you?
Identification as a Follower
Reviewing my present career supervisor, it is somewhat easier to view their attributes as lacking, but only against an overlay of other leaders in similar roles. My present company supervisor, the head of the organization, is a dynamic leader with strong regard for corporate culture. They value hard work that matches their own charisma. Organizationally, they bring an excitement to new opportunities which give a uniquely high drive of performance to followers. This leader is very much someone that has developed a culture of satisfaction throughout the organization. However, their followers suffer in the evolution of climate.
Climate and culture differ in many ways but are universally important. Climate describes a shared perception of the individuals in the company, whereas culture involves peoples beliefs, values, and assumptions (Stolp & Smith, 1995). The leader in review here has a tremendous continual focus on culture but is unable to view climate as an equal necessity. The challenge, especially in the present, is that climate, or the perception of the followers, is almost more important. Our culture has naturally suffered being in a remote environment for so long now. But climate doesnt necessarily have to be affected. But, when climate is not a focus, to begin with, then situations like the present suffer even more. Climate brings something that, unfortunately, is this leaders weakness which is trust.
Rico, Alcover, and Barrasa (2005) discuss change-oriented leader actions by continually analyzing and modifying team climate accordingly and providing empowerment and delegation to followers. Again, this is a weakness of the leader here as they lack the trust naturally built in a positive climate which allows for these actions to take place. Mistrust which leads to limited empowerment and delegation opportunities is a hindrance to the excitement curve.
Improvements to this should improve a review of climate. For one, this could be as simple as understanding that climate and culture are different, which many leaders probably do not understand. Also, the improvement factors are relatively simple but take personal awareness.
When I first started at my present firm, the organization leader had everyone take this leadership quiz. At the time, I tested high in the commanding category and, interestingly, the only other member of staff in that area was my supervisor, the chief executive. At that point in time, as I was in a role that was over much of the company employees, I agreed with that assessment. But over the past few years, my role and my idea of leadership have changed dramatically.
When taking this assessment now, I find myself deeply rooted in the coaching category. Again, I agree with this evaluation as it says a lot about who I am today. Frankly, I was a terrible leader as a commander. I believe that at that time I took that notion too seriously and was an at all cost type of leader. According to Goleman (2000), the commanding leader brings a negative climate to the organization. This justifies my earlier supervisor evaluation but certainly shows that I too was part of the issue, at least at the beginning of my tenure. As someone who understands that I have more personal value in the coaching behavior, I now bring more positivity with me, though my leadership within the organization has unfortunately suffered.
I do wish, however, that I could find an understandable balance within these two areas. Primarily, I feel that I could better understand my organizations commanding leader. I have found that as a coaching leader, I greatly differ in my approach to that of a commanding leader. Because, by nature, the commanding leader is absolute in authority, they often dont understand other approaches, especially a more positive approach such as coaching. It would be beneficial to better understand where the commonalities between these two are in order for each of us to lead effectively and without confrontation.
Goleman, D. (2000). Leadership That Gets Results. Harvard Business Review.
Rico, F., Alcover, C., & Barrasa, A. (2005). Change-oriented leadership, satisfaction and performance in work groups: Effects of team climate and group potency. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 20(3/4) , 312-328.
Stolp, S., & Smith, S. C. (1995). Transforming school culture: stories, symbols, values, and the leaders role. ERIC Clearninghouse of Educational Management.
"Place your order now for a similar assignment and have exceptional work written by our team of experts, guaranteeing you A results."