One thing that has become obvious to me throughout my
venture in the leadership program is that the world is made up of many
different types of leaders and there is no cookie cutter recipe on how to
become a successful leader. What type of leader do you consider yourself in
relation to your followers? Are you more
focused on the goals or the people of the organization? Are you more apt to
push information and ideas onto your followers or pull information from your followers?
Is one action better than the other or does the situation drive the action?
Utilizing exercise 10.1 in the Obolensky (2014) text, I was able to determine
the area I fall within the leadership scale.
The funny thing is that before I began the leadership
program I did not see myself as a leader in any form or fashion. I did not
think I had the confidence to be successful in the leadership program let alone
see myself as a leader. I had false a perception
of what leadership actually was. I now
realize that leadership can come from each and every position in an
organization. Obolensky (2014) stated that there are four styles of situational
leadership styles including Telling (S1), Selling (S2), Involving (S3) and
Devolving (S4). After completing the exercise, I discovered that I follow the
involving (S3) style of situational leadership.
Obolensky (2014) offered various scenarios including “Your
subordinates are highly qualified and are well capable of doing a good job. But
they have not performed as well as they could and do not seem keen to do so”
(p. 168). I chose the answer that allowed the subordinates to be most involved.
I would ask why performance seems to be declining and pursue recommendations on
how to increase performance. Other choices included reiterating to them about
the targets (tell), monitor the situation but take no action at this point in
time (devolve), and remind them of benefits reached by hitting the targets
(sell). How do you think you would handle this situation?
My decision of asking the followers to become involved in
solving the performance issue is one example of why I fit into the (S3) style
of leadership. I have always felt that knowledge should be shared with all who
are willing to accept. The pull approach of the (S3) style of management allows
me to educate followers while helping them develop additional skills. Heifetz
and Laurie (1997) stated that leaders must alter their thinking in adaptive
situations. The traditional way to handle issues was relying on leadership
through solutions, but in adaptive situations leaders must begin to rely on
their employees to be the catalyst for the solution. (Heifetz & Laurie,
1997). This altered point of view of relying on the followers and not the
solutions is in line with the (S3) leadership style which is more concentrated
on people than on goals.
I am not surprised by where I ranked in the leadership
matrix. I have always valued people and believe that teaching someone to
understand is more valuable than telling them what to do. What I did find
surprising was the volume in which my answers related to (S3) leadership. The
answer I chose was linked to (S3) leadership in nine of the sixteen questions.
According to Obolensky (2014), my score indicated that I could become too
emotionally invested and work too hard. This also does not surprise me because
according to Rath and Conchie (2008), I ranked as an achiever. “People strong
in the Achiever theme have a great deal of stamina and hard work. They take
great satisfaction from being busy and productive” (Rath & Conchie, 2008, p.
103). I would not agree 100% with taking pride in being productive, but I have
always seen myself as a dedicated worker when attempting to complete a goal.
As I previously mentioned, I have learned a lot about myself
and the type of leader I am over the course of the leadership program. The
learning process and reformed line of thinking have continued in this class.
One important bit of information discussed in this class was chaos theory. As I
have discussed in previous assignments, I am a preparer and like to have an
answer for every issue or problem. Chaos theory made me change my thinking for
the better. Sometimes things will seem chaotic and complex but I must continue
to trust the process.
My thinking regarding followers has also changed throughout
this class. I had the short-sighted thought process that there were three types
of followers. One follower spent their day riding out the clock and trying to
unnoticeably do as little as possible until it was time to go home and do it
all over again. Another follower spent their day doing everything possible to
be noticed and maybe have a chance to move up the proverbial ladder. The final
follower was somewhere between the other two types of followers. They possessed
a mid-level skill and will. They did not want to do so much that they were
noticed and labeled the star student, but also did not want to be put at the
back of the class. It was interesting to learn about the levels of followership
and discover that high-level followers exist with no intention of becoming a
leader.
One goal I have developed after taking part in this exercise
is that my style of leadership may need to be slightly altered. Obolensky
(2014) stated that a leader should ideally hold a combination of the four
styles of leadership. The fact that I lean very heavily toward the (S3) style
could at some point become a bad thing. In certain situations, I may need to
venture from my pull strategy and adapt a push strategy. If the situation
warrants a different method then I must be willing to come out of the comforts
of my (S3) style to acclimate the correct style temporarily. Becoming too one
dimensional could lead to bad leadership methods and potentially cause harm to
the department or organization.
Reference
Heifetz, R. & Laurie, D. (1997).The work of leadership. Harvard Business Review. Retrieved from http://web.a.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.libproxy.db.erau.edu/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?sid=e44b3498-3149-4e4e-8b4f-5d716551ce54%40sessionmgr4009&vid=1&hid=4206
Obolensky, N. (2014). Complex adaptive leadership: Embracing paradox and uncertainty (2nd ed.). Gower.
Rath, T. & Conchie, B. (2008). Strengths based leadership. New York, NY: Gallup Press
No comments:
Post a Comment