Determining_Your_Perfect_Position

Position Running head: POSITION 1 Determining My Perfect Position July 13, 2009 LDR 531 – Organizational Leadership Prof. Aileen Smith Position 2 Introduction The company that I am working for is not only experiencing rapid expansion, but is also going through an organizational restructure. I have been offered the unique position of determining the leadership role or position that will best suit me. In order to do so effectively, I will look at (a) the strengths and weaknesses of my personal leadership style, (b) the comparisons and contrasts of leadership theories in order to determine one that is most relevant to me, (c) create and explain my personal leadership style model, and (d) describe the role or position within my company that I feel is best suited my leadership style. Strengths and Weaknesses of My Leadership Style Completion of several self-assessments has given me some additional insight into numerous factors (including but not limited to my leadership style, level of charisma and my trust in others). One strength that I am able to produce ‘on demand’ is my level of charisma. I am naturally very outgoing, very dramatic and very socially aware. I enjoy talking to people (including large groups) and always look for ways to keep the attention of my audience. Having the assessment confirm my charismatic personality was definitely no surprise. What was surprising, was the discovery that this assessment placed me in a category somewhere in the middle of the task- and relationship-oriented leadership style (something only “16% of respondents” fall into) with the same score on each style (Robbins and Judge, 2007). However, I believe that I am slightly more task-oriented which means that at times I place more focus or emphasis on completing a task or meeting a deadline than I do on developing relationships. This is not always a negative Position 3 characteristic, but one that I have to be aware of in order to maintain a healthy balance. Equally important is having the skill to effectively discipline employees as the need arises. According to Pearson-Prentice Hall, my score on this assessment indicates that: “I understand that effective discipline recognizes the need to provide ample warning, act in a timely fashion, use a calm and serious tone, be specific about the problem, keep the process impersonal and that disciplinary action should be progressive and consider mitigating circumstances” (2007). I feel that this skill has been learned through a combination of efforts. First, I have been lucky enough to experience all ends of this spectrum through the disciplinary styles incorporated by various managers. I have learned through watching others the disciplinary styles that did and did not work in a number of different organizations and cultures. Second, I think that my desire to treat others in a way that I would want to be treated impacts the decisions and behaviors that I enact. This desire to treat others fairly is also why I demonstrate equal amounts of the four leadership behaviors: directive, participative, achievement-oriented and supportive. Unfortunately, not all of my behaviors fall into a ‘strength’ classification, and there is one specific area that is a rather large weakness. One of the areas that I continually strive to improve in (and one that I have been aware of for some time) is that of trusting others. Although a score of 3 on the assessment would indicate that I fall in the middle regarding my faith in others, I have a hard time allowing people to perform certain tasks because I do not trust them to Position 4 complete the task to the same standard that I would. This weakness becomes especially evident when working on detail-oriented projects. But, having this weakness does not mean that I have to forego any ideas of corporate leadership; instead I must recognize the situations and positions that are better suited to my strengths. This can be done by looking at some of the leadership theories in existence today. Leadership Theories Compared and Contrasted Situational Leadership Theory Developed by Paul Hersey and Ken Blanchard, the situational leadership theory (SLT) focuses on the employees or “followers” (Robbins and Judge, 2007). The SLT argues that an effective leader will have a balance of leadership styles that can be engaged depending on the employees’ readiness. In other words, if the employees are “able and willing” do accomplish tasks without much supervision, then the leader does not need to do much supervision and can assume a “highly laissez-faire” leadership behavior (2007). In contrast, if the employees are “unable and unwilling” then the leader will need to become highly directive (2007). Path-Goal Theory The path-goal theory suggests that it is “the leader’s job to provide followers with the information, support, or other resources necessary for them to achieve their goals” (Robbins and Judge, 2007). Perhaps most closely aligned with my own personal style, this theory “assumes leaders are flexible and that the same leader can display and or all” of the following behaviors (2007): • Directive – assigns tasks, provides guidance on how to accomplish tasks, and schedules the work to be done. Position 5 • • Supportive – friendly and shows concern for the employees. Participative – seeks the advice of employees and group consensus or before making decision. • Achievement-oriented – seeks high levels of performance to meet challenging goals. Leadership Substitutes Theory (LST) The theory that is least relevant to my own personal style is the leadership substitutes theory. Kerr and Jermier created a model that allowed substitutes to replace the behaviors of leaders making them “unnecessary and redundant” (Yukl, 2006). At the core of this theory is the idea that the characteristics of employees and/or tasks will create a substitution for leadership. It is suggested that employees with high levels of experience and/or qualifications do not need guidance because they understand the role they fill. Furthermore, the LST suggests that these professionals “are internally motivated by their values, needs, and ethics and do not need to be encouraged by the leader to do high-quality work” (2006). The leadership substitutes theory also claims that “simple, repetitive tasks” can be learned quickly and without the guidance of leaders or under supervision (Yukl. 2006). It is also believed that the task itself is sufficient to provide motivation and job satisfaction, thus negating the need for supervision. “However, it is important to remember that their model was designed to deal only with substitutes for leadership behavior by a formal leader” but quite often, behavior by a formal leader is simply “replaced by similar leadership behavior carried out by peers or other informal leaders” (2006). Position 6 Personal Leadership Style Model After reviewing numerous leadership theories (including those listed above) and studying their models, I have come to the conclusion that my model would look and operate completely different. With my personal model (see Figure 1), my equally dominant task- and people-oriented leadership styles would provide the foundation of my model. The four leadership behaviors would also overlap with the two styles in order to create a synergistic success. If carried out successfully, this model would lead to the development of motivated, capable employees that are not only self-aware, but also cognizant of the organizational culture, it’s mission, values and visions. An additional benefit of this model would be the demonstration to employees of my willingness to adapt to their needs and also serve as a reminder to myself the importance of balance and flexibility. Position 7 The Perfect Position After considering numerous positions and the roles that they fill, I have come to the conclusion that there is one position that will fit me perfectly – Training Director. In reality, this position is very task-oriented and requires a great deal of planning and organization before employees are even brought into the mix. But, I would also be able to utilize my charisma to help develop skills, enhance productivity and quality of work, and build loyalty to the firm through creative and innovative deliveries. The variety of people that I would work with would allow me to utilize both my people skills and a number of leadership behaviors as I continue to develop and enhance these traits within me. Conclusion This look into various leadership theories combined with my own personal assessments has been an interesting journey. Not only has it helped me to recognize and work with the strengths I already have, but it has reinforced the importance of finding a position that ‘fits’ (for my sake as well of those around me). I may not always be able to create my perfect position, but I can avoid the imperfect ones! Position 8 References Pearson Prentice Hall. (2007). Self-assessment library. Retrieved July 10, 2009, from https://ecampus.phoenix.edu/secure/aapd/sas/robbins_sal3v3/sal3v3web.html Robbins, S. P., and Judge, T. A. (2007). Organizational behavior (12th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education. Yukl, G. (2006). Leadership in organizations (6th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education.