Take the opportunity to reflect specifically on Yukl's material on pages 63 through 72, Supportive Behavior.
Assuming that these leadership behaviors are appropriate at all levels of organizations, do you use these behaviors in your work with others? Subordinates? If so, how are they effective in producing results? If not, could they be added to your personal repertoire of leadership behaviors?
There are really three parts to being a supportive leader: mentally and emotionally supporting your fellow co-worker or subordinate, providing praise and recognition where necessary and finally developing the skills of that subordinate to the maximum effect.
Yukl (2013) defines supportive leadership as "showing consideration, acceptance and concern for the needs and feelings of other people.....building and maintaining effective interpersonal relationships" (p.63). It is interesting that supportive leadership not only reduces the amount of stress in a workplace (Khalid et al, p. 487, 2012) but also usually ends up with the same reflection back towards you from the subordinate or co-worker. I guess the old adage of 'treat others how you would like to be treated' really does have some purchase here. In addition, Yukl describes other benefits: " Supportive leadership may increase a subordinates acceptance of a leader, trust of a leader, and willingness to do extra things for the leader". Sounds like a perfect elixir all round.
Development of a coworkers or subordinates skills should be equally important. It is accomplished through supportive mentoring, coaching and by providing developmental opportunities (like courses, trade events and maybe even a masters degree or two!) According to Bradford & Cohen (1984), "most effective managers take an active role in developing the skills and confidence of subordinates" (p.126). In addition to the obvious benefits to the manager, the subordinate lucks out too, with better job satisfaction, an increase in skill set and a faster career development to name but a few.
Finally, there is giving praise when it is warranted, and sometime in my own experience, even when it is not. Very occasionally an employee will require a pick me up, and its hard to find something good to praise him for - but there is always something, no matter how meaningless. I once had a rep who was just terrible, and yet he seemed to respond well for at least a short time to praise and basically "blowing smoke". While the guy was being trained and to keep him interested we would find all sorts of meaningless praises to keep him going - which although not really very ethical (because it wasn't heartfelt) we did still want to try to help this guy overall. In the end I think he got awards for the cleanest rep car, the best paperwork and a couple of times was praised more than most for securing an order that frankly my 10 year old could get with his eyes shut. Sometimes I went on sales calls with him, got the order, and let him take the credit.
This accomplished two things of the three above at least - gained trust, showed support and maybe (if he was paying attention) increased his skills so he would be able to get a similar order by himself.
So the question remains - do I use these behaviors with others, and the answer is an uncomplicated - maybe. There are certainly times when I want things from someone, or need their cooperation for mutual benefit, that require the use of some of those skills mentioned above. A certain amount of praise is good, but pilots are a wary bunch and will always be skeptical about sudden bouts of praise and recognition. In these cases it is important to have a continued reputation for always looking to praise - something I don't have, but should work on with a view to one day being their boss. I do have a reputation of being a little sarcastic, and also that I do not suffer fools lightly. It can never be said that nobody knows where they stand with me, or that I hold a grudge. I see myself though sometimes as a bit of a manipulator, disguised as concern, and I wonder weather other coworkers have picked up on the same. Usually, an issue is worth fighting, and I try to garner support for the cause or at least agreement on the issue before tackling this myself. On some occasions I have wanted others to broach the subject first - perhaps a training captain who would have more persuasive gravitas with the Chief Pilot than a humble line pilot such as myself. Usually this takes the form of bolstering their own self esteem and confidence that they have the correct solution - a tactic recognized by Yukl (2013, p64).
Developing Subordinate Skills is something I love companies to do, but receive little of in return for the most part. It's one of the first things to go in a budget crunch, and always the first thing to go when an Executive Committee member dares to mention the words "save money where possible". I place far more value on this than I receive in return. People who have worked for me have always been encouraged to learn new skills, take new courses, degrees, go to trade shows or other conferences related to their work. I have authorized the payment for trade magazines to be sent to subordinates and organized those weekend where everyone gets together and builds a teamwork bridge using 2 poles and 6 blue barrels. I think the return on investment is huge - but it is something that larger companies still do not get yet. However, some of the skills outlined in Yukl and other readings are certainly food for thought and should be practiced by me more readily for a longer term approach to my future.
References:
Bradford, D.L., & Cohen, A.R. (1984). Managing for excellence: The guide to developing high performance organizations. New York: John Wiley.
Khalid, A., Murtaza, G., Zafar, A., Zafar, M. A., Saqib, L., & Mushtaq, R. (2012). Role of supportive leadership as a moderator between job stress and job performance. Information Management and Business Review, 4(9), 487-495. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com.ezproxy.libproxy.db.erau.edu/docview/1326738276?accountid=27203
Yukl, G. (2013). Leadership in Organizations. (8th ed., pp. 63-72.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson-Prentice Hall.
January 24, 2014
January 19, 2014
A511.1.3.RB_LloydPayneDamien
Watch this video:
http://www.youtube.com/watchv=u4ZoJKF_VuA&feature=share&list=PL42F8562DCD3CCEA8 Then for this reflective analysis, create a submission that encapsulates content from the module as well as your own thoughts on the issue of the intersection of leadership/management.
I have always found, like Simon Sinek that there are two reasons to take a job. The first is because you need the money, and the money being offered is better than the money you have in the job you are in - so why not do the same job for essentially more money? The second reason for accepting a job has nothing to do with benefits: it is either because you really believe what the company is doing is important or because you really believe that you and the person hiring you are the same person. For example, a doctor who joins Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF) International and helps out at refugee camps around the world does so because he believes in the cause. Someone who started the Apple organization and gave up their executive job to work alongside Steve Jobs probably did so because Steve was the person they wanted to be with.
In my own life I started by taking jobs for the latter, and ended up taking jobs for the former. I am not entirely sure whether that is because as I grew older and gained more responsibilities to feed and clothe my children that this became a necessity or whether it was as I grew older I just became more cynical. One thing though that is true - the jobs where you believe what the employer believes are now few and far between. Worse still, I find that many corporations actually believe in nothing, but try to convince employees that they do through mission statements of global 'dogooding'. This false prophet company are the ones that seem also to pay well to attract the talent on a false basis in the first place, but usually has high turnover of staff. In my opinion they are the worse kind.
What I found most interesting about the differences between management and leadership, and is not mention enough in the text, is that leadership is not something that can be taught because we can all be leaders. I don't think that there are 'natural born leaders' or people who have been mentored into leadership so they have the right stuff. What I believe (and agree with Simon Sinek) is that great leaders believe in something, and they believe with so much passion that it is infectious, and more and more people who also believe join together to create a great leader. In fact, every great historical leader can be shown to believe in something - even if history showed it was the wrong thing to believe in. Adolf Hitler believed in the Aryan race and that Germany was subjugated to the rest of Europe from the Versailles treaty - something most of Germany also believed and so followed his leadership. Winston Churchill believed that England could indefinitely stand alone against Germany, despite Ambassador Kennedy reporting to FDR that England was finished. As it happened the British Public agreed with Winston and followed his oratory genius.
Belief in a team, believing you can win is vital to any sports teams success. That's why we have 'giant killers'. Its not because the leader is so great but because the leader has surrounded himself with a team of people who all believe the same thing.
I once worked at Hoechst Roussel Vet, where every year we would go to a sales conference in a 5 star hotel sometime in Europe and build ourselves up in front of a new campaign in sales. At one conference one young man stood out as the person people wanted to be on a team with. He wasn't a manager, yet he led teams to success, applause and accolades for the way the team presented information or worked together to solve marketing games designed to teach us about products. Everyone on that team felt good about being there, and this guy quickly became the person people of a like mind gravitated to. It was so noticeable, others, including me, started to emulate his style, but I only really became successful when I also emulated his beliefs. This wasn't hard because it was what I believed in too, but what it did teach me is exactly what Simon says in his video. Leaders gain followers who believe in the why and not in the what we do.
Sadly, it seems, these people are rarer nowadays, and this may be because when times are hard, companies are looking more for results than for ideals, and lose sight of the facts that ideals are what make results in the long term. Companies today have such a short term viewpoint that the long term belief structure suffers for it and their pool of potential leaders vanish while strict managers of the short term flourish. Unfortunately, it's not just the lack of leadership that suffers, it is also those that work for the managers.
http://www.youtube.com/watchv=u4ZoJKF_VuA&feature=share&list=PL42F8562DCD3CCEA8 Then for this reflective analysis, create a submission that encapsulates content from the module as well as your own thoughts on the issue of the intersection of leadership/management.
I have always found, like Simon Sinek that there are two reasons to take a job. The first is because you need the money, and the money being offered is better than the money you have in the job you are in - so why not do the same job for essentially more money? The second reason for accepting a job has nothing to do with benefits: it is either because you really believe what the company is doing is important or because you really believe that you and the person hiring you are the same person. For example, a doctor who joins Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF) International and helps out at refugee camps around the world does so because he believes in the cause. Someone who started the Apple organization and gave up their executive job to work alongside Steve Jobs probably did so because Steve was the person they wanted to be with.
In my own life I started by taking jobs for the latter, and ended up taking jobs for the former. I am not entirely sure whether that is because as I grew older and gained more responsibilities to feed and clothe my children that this became a necessity or whether it was as I grew older I just became more cynical. One thing though that is true - the jobs where you believe what the employer believes are now few and far between. Worse still, I find that many corporations actually believe in nothing, but try to convince employees that they do through mission statements of global 'dogooding'. This false prophet company are the ones that seem also to pay well to attract the talent on a false basis in the first place, but usually has high turnover of staff. In my opinion they are the worse kind.
What I found most interesting about the differences between management and leadership, and is not mention enough in the text, is that leadership is not something that can be taught because we can all be leaders. I don't think that there are 'natural born leaders' or people who have been mentored into leadership so they have the right stuff. What I believe (and agree with Simon Sinek) is that great leaders believe in something, and they believe with so much passion that it is infectious, and more and more people who also believe join together to create a great leader. In fact, every great historical leader can be shown to believe in something - even if history showed it was the wrong thing to believe in. Adolf Hitler believed in the Aryan race and that Germany was subjugated to the rest of Europe from the Versailles treaty - something most of Germany also believed and so followed his leadership. Winston Churchill believed that England could indefinitely stand alone against Germany, despite Ambassador Kennedy reporting to FDR that England was finished. As it happened the British Public agreed with Winston and followed his oratory genius.
Belief in a team, believing you can win is vital to any sports teams success. That's why we have 'giant killers'. Its not because the leader is so great but because the leader has surrounded himself with a team of people who all believe the same thing.
I once worked at Hoechst Roussel Vet, where every year we would go to a sales conference in a 5 star hotel sometime in Europe and build ourselves up in front of a new campaign in sales. At one conference one young man stood out as the person people wanted to be on a team with. He wasn't a manager, yet he led teams to success, applause and accolades for the way the team presented information or worked together to solve marketing games designed to teach us about products. Everyone on that team felt good about being there, and this guy quickly became the person people of a like mind gravitated to. It was so noticeable, others, including me, started to emulate his style, but I only really became successful when I also emulated his beliefs. This wasn't hard because it was what I believed in too, but what it did teach me is exactly what Simon says in his video. Leaders gain followers who believe in the why and not in the what we do.
Sadly, it seems, these people are rarer nowadays, and this may be because when times are hard, companies are looking more for results than for ideals, and lose sight of the facts that ideals are what make results in the long term. Companies today have such a short term viewpoint that the long term belief structure suffers for it and their pool of potential leaders vanish while strict managers of the short term flourish. Unfortunately, it's not just the lack of leadership that suffers, it is also those that work for the managers.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)