A511.6.4.RB_LloydPayneDamien

Now, reflect on what you have read and viewed and what it means when we say that leaders must create a “cause” or "meaning." Relate this to the theory of leading change. Use examples and apply the work of others where necessary.

The thing with leading is, it is not just about being in the front of the charge or demanding people do what you want, regardless of the consequences - that stuff is for Hollywood or fiction writers.  To lead truly meaningful change, one has to be able to connect that vision with the people you are trying to get towards that vision.  Yukl (2013) agrees: "A vision should be simple and idealistic, a picture of the desirable future.....should appeal to the values, hopes and ideals of organization members" (p. 89).

You see, there is something very basic in man that wants to enjoy what he is doing, or working towards some form of accomplishment that gives him the purest satisfaction of all.  Interestingly, the sense that one will obtain that is so overwhelming that the work can be dangerous, poorly paid or just downright dirty - and still man can feel good about being in a job.

According to Ulrich (2010) it is not necessarily all about the job.  An activity can be meaningful "when it resonates with chosen values, connects them with people they like, raises their sense of competence, or gives them an “ah-ha” moment of insight."

So back to leading these people to that Ah-ha moment.  A leader then, has a more complex job than it first appears.  It's not just about appealing to those key stakeholders, it's about discovering what it really is that turns them on, or what they share as ideals and values and then taking those ideals and shaping a vision around them so as to get the greatest amount of appeal to the target audience.  And that's no mean feat.

As a manager at Avon, the company ethos was all about the people that worked there.  It was there to make money and to encourage sales for sure, but at the real heart of everything was their passion for the employee.  I had never worked for a company quiet like it.  It wasn't that they were empowering employees; it was more as if they were including employees in everything that they did.  Everyone was happy, and everyone liked working with everyone else.  For some the money wasn't the best either, but each and every employee identified with the values of Avon and loved working towards their goals, no matter what their own set of circumstances.  Leading in this environment was surprisingly easy, because everyone was almost instantly on board.  By making employees feel valued, giving them greater self esteem, and doing what is right by them, each and every employee continually gave 110%.  There were satisfying moments up and down the command chain almost every day.

What Avon had done is what many companies now miss in their never ending search to satisfy the mystery shareholder.  They had given their employees emotional safety and autonomy to make things work.  Each employee felt that their work was meaningful, and that lead to unprecedented commitment to the company and through that the results it wanted in a highly competitive field.

So what can leaders do to ensure the maximum number of people have a sense of purpose and meaning in their work? Here are some thoughts:

• Create a positive vision of the future. If we have a common goal, then it is possible to actually get excited about the future.
• Build morale the right way. I.E: by treating them with respect and giving them autonomy, not huge bonuses and extra vacation days. Leaders do not motivate people; rather they create the environment where people decide whether to become motivated. 
• Recognize and celebrate excellence while treating people right. 
• Have high ethical and moral standards. Operate from a set of values and make sure people know why those values are important. Leaders need to always live their values.
• Challenge people and set high expectations. People will rise to a challenge if it is properly presented and managed. 
• Operate with high Emotional Intelligence. Without Emotional Intelligence, leaders do not have the ability to transform intentions into meaning within people. 

References:
Yukl, G. (2013). Leadership in Organizations. (8th ed., pp. 63-72.). Upper Saddle River, NJ:

Pearson-Prentice Hall.

Urlich, D. & Ulrich, W. Getting Beyond Engagement to Creating Meaning at Work. Harvard Business review. June 2, 2010. Retrieved from: http://blogs.hbr.org/cs/2010/06/getting_beyond_engagement_to_c.html

A511.5.3.RB_LloydPayneDamien

Good academic research is a process. The article entitled Remote Transformational Leadership (https://erau.blackboard.com/bbcswebdav/pid-14117994-dt-content-rid-25229761_4/xid-25229761_4) is an example of scholarly work done around a leadership topic. Once you have read the article, reflect on its content.

What was the point of the research?
Remote leaders are leaders who do not daily see their followers and instead communicate by email, text or by video conference. The point of this research is to further study whether a remote leader, i.e: a leader who has no face-to-face contact with his follower can be effective at motivating that follower and produce a positive effect on his work and the effort the follower puts in, just by mentioning transformational or charismatic things in an email.

What were the hypotheses?
The hypothesis of these experiments were twofold.  Firstly, the author's hypothesized that people receiving an email from a leader could determine and accurately match the style of leadership from the contents.  The second hypothesis was that those same messages of positive encouragement, typical in transformational leadership ,would produce positive outcomes just as if it were a face to face meeting.

What was the research method used?
There were two research methods.  In the first instance, groups of students read a vignette, each person receiving a different of 3 groups of vignettes so that no two people sat next to each other with the same vignette. The second experiment was a laboratory setting where groups solved a popular NASA task having received one of three leadership type emails.

Were the results supportive of the research goals?
Indeed, the results bore out the hypothesis.  Individuals can detect charismatic leaders from the style of an email and/or it's content, and that having received such an email, their productivity was increased.

Of what value was the research?
The value of this research was that it disproved previously held assumptions that remote leadership was hard, if not impossible, because the visual clues usually associated with the face-to-face contact with leadership brought much to the stimulation and resulting performance of the follower.  The other important value was described as "it is possible to manipulate separate components of transformational leadership" (Kelloway et. al., 2002).  This will open the doors for further research on the unique outcomes of the component parts of transformational leadership.
There are other secondary considerations with this research that may allow a learning opportunity for HR departments and corporations in general.  The power of electronic communication in modern organizations is no less potent than the face to face meeting, and possibly more important to study due to it's prevalence in today's businesses.  What may be a future topic for discussion at some companies is a pro-forma style communication bank to gain the most from followers, without the need to employee charismatic or otherwise proven transformational leaders, at some cost.  In other words, if a follower can distinguish charismatic leadership from an email, this style must be easily copied and reproduced.  Without having met the leader, followers can deduce this same conclusion just by reading an email purportedly from this leader, even though it may well have been written by the company.  Perhaps a future need for remote charismatic communications department will be a staple in organizations of the future.

 
reference:
Kelloway, E. K., Barling, J., Kelley, E., Comtois, J., & Gatien, B. (2002). Remote transformational leadership. Leadership and Organization Development Journal , 24 (3), 163-171.

A511.4.3.RB_LloydPayneDamien

Reflect on the week’s readings and content. In your own words, summarize key points related to managerial motivation, traits, and effectiveness. Then assess your own leadership skills, traits, and competencies. Where are you strong? How can you leverage those strengths to improve your value to organizations like your employer? How might contingency theory and situational variables assist in that process?

Managerial effectiveness is important to companies, because without an effective manager, production and efficiency just cannot be maximized.  Worse still, other negatives may well be more prevalent like an increase in staff turnover, low motivation of staff, poor relations with outside sources and reduced profit margins.  None of these are desirable in a modern competitive market.  The skills that a manager must master to be an effective leader are often highlighted in several traits that have been recognized and studied in past research.  A trait is basically a variety of individual attributes, whether that be a personality trait or a need each is augmented through learning or through gaining satisfaction from experiences along the way.

My own leadership skills, traits and competencies do not make a long list, but I think I posses some of the more important ones:

1.  I love to work with people, not against them.
 I find great satisfaction in just being with people and helping them achieve their results, and more importantly take pride in adding value to finding a solution with them.  I try not to get bogged down in managing people - or worse still, micro-managing the details, instead I like to form a partnership with those needing help, in as much of a mentoring role as a leader role.  I think the fact that people do seem to share their problems with me is a good indication that another trait that I possess is some amount of empathy, which I believe is another important trait to have in being an effective manager.  I also take from my teenage and young adult life many of the lessons I learnt as a farmer.  The lessons of sew, nurture, grow and reap all have a bearing when looking at helping manage individuals or even groups.  Doing these things in that order takes time, can seem repetitive, but must be done with every person or project to guarantee success.  These lessons always come in handy and I'm definitely strong in this department.

2. Communication Skills.
One of the best things I inherited from my parents was the ability to communicate with almost anyone of any age, gender or background.  But even more important I think is my ability to listen.  Manager's rarely see the importance of this skill, and yet listening is so simple.  Good communication skills also include understanding your audience and communication in such a way that the audience can understand and communicate back to you. As such, my communication style changes a little based on the audience it's intended for.

3. Decision Making.
My third most important trait is that of my ability to make a decision.  I have heard it  said somewhere that decision making is one of the casualties of today's knowledge industry.  I think this is particularly prevalent in bigger corporations, where decisions are put off for even more discussion around the subject.  Because of the hierarchical nature of many of these companies, these decisions are often made over and over again as the process moves up the chain, delayed only by the same discussions repeated at every level.

I think I can leverage these strengths in my company in the coming months to greater effect than I currently am. Communication is probably going to be the key.  Change is coming, and sometimes, those in the position of making a promotion a reality are paralyzed in that process by only having been communicated one of the options.  I think I need to make sure my skills are communicated to those people in the appropriate manner.  I also believe that taking on projects that are highly visible and yet require good decision are something again that I need to acquire.  Contingency theory can help me in this quest by helping me to understand how some of those people I need to influence look at subordinates.  There is possibility there for manipulation to gain the best possible outcome for myself.

A511.3.3.RB_LloydPayneDamien

For this reflective exercise, first demonstrate your knowledge of the theory of power and influence (Hint: See the learning objectives on page 185 of your text). Then, reflect on the power that you personally bring to your work place (if you are not employed, think about an organization of which you are part…such as your family or your church).
What are the sources of that power?
What is the nature of that power?
How is it used or not used?
How is that power related to your ability to lead or follow?
Finally, if it applies, have you experienced high quality LMX situations within your workplace which are dysfunctional in the sense that Othamn et al describe in the extra reading material for this module?

There are five main points to consider when you talk about power and influence - and in any office environment, everyone always worries about who has the power and influence, and if they have it - how are they going to protect it, and if they do not have it - how are they going to get more of it!
The five key points are:

1.  Power is the capacity to influence the attitudes and behavior of people in the desired direction.
2.  Social Exchange theory explains how power is lost and gained.
3.  Potential influence derived from a managers position in the organization is called position power.
4. Potential influence derived from the characteristics of the person who occupies a leadership position is called Personal Power
5. The success of a manager depends on how his power is wielded.
(Yukl, 2013)

I have a certain amount of power in my organization - none of it resulting from any position that I hold there - because I don't hold a position there of any mention.  My personal power comes from two sources: my expert power and my small amount of referent power.  In the first type of power, expert power, I spend much time making sure that I know my job and my aircraft as well as I can. This involves reading aircraft manuals and emergency procedures as well as digesting standard operating procedures and memorizing limitations. This does not get any easier as I get older.  The more information I store away about the company operating procedures, the more information I have to lose to make way for it.  I currently can never find my keys, forget where I have left my wallet and am always leaving things behind, all because I have memorized the procedures for using the minimum equipment list and stored in my brain the countless changes to the operating manual each month!

Expert power however has it's uses.  Over time, people begin to ask you many questions, and I am able to give them the answers.  The more answers I give that are good, the more my expert power increases.  The more my expert power increases, the more stock I hold as personal power. Yukl (2013) agrees that it is major source of personal power. It is quite a tentative power - I do not do much to protect the knowledge I have, after all, everyone could gain the same knowledge if they bothered to study!  Eventually, someone else will see the power I wield and decide they want some of that too.

This is one of the reasons that I back up the expert power with a dab of reverent power.  Reverent power is essentially power derived from others identifying with you, having feelings of admiration and loyalty towards me and generally derived from me coming off as a nice guy: "the strongest form of referent power involves the influence process called personal identification" (Yukl, 2013, p. 191).
Thats not to say that I am not a nice guy, I am.  I think some of the power here derives from the fact that I have one helluva story.  Here's a guy, knew nothing of helicopters, emigrated with two tiny kids having given up a very promising career, to live without a support structure and battle his way to the top of the corporate flying ladder in the quickest time anyone has ever seen. In addition, it's a great reflection of the American Dream - something all Americans love to hear is still alive and well.  There's a certain kudos that comes with that, and it all adds into the stocks of referent power.

In combination, referent and expert power can make quite a team. Research indicates that those who possess referent power not only have the widest range of influence tactics available they possess the most effective form of power for influencing others. Leaders with referent power generally do not use legitimizing or pressure tactics to influence others, they simply do not have to.  (Anderson, 1998).  I'm not saying that I have enough power to really wield against say a boss and win if the case was just 50/50, but laterally, among my peers it is a distinct advantage.

In fact, it would be fair to say that I don't use that power at all.  I'm still the new guy in the company, even though every year that idea spreads a little thinner  - until eventually it will evaporate altogether.  No, instead I am saving as much power as I can to help influence decisions when it comes to judgement day - the replacement of the Chief Pilot when she retires.  What is interesting for my bosses is that if they recognize that I have a small amount of personal power, they also recognize that I am using it to be a good follower.  A good follower is important to the success of the leader. (Yukl, 2013).  I'm helpful to her as the person she can trust with some tasks that she doesn't want to do, but I have not yet replaced any of her trusted lieutenants currently in place - that would take more time.  I do however tread a fine line in helping my bosses decisions get implemented and challenge a few decisions along the way if they are necessary.  I also feel that I benefit from helping - in many ways I'm learning more about the job I hope to have in the future the more involved I am.

There is a situation at work that my current leader has created with regards to a dysfunctional Leader-Member exchange.  At the flight department, position power among pilots is obtained through being either the pilot that does the scheduling for everyone (ecological power) and the training captains (expert and information power).  Both these positions are seen as the positions that the chief pilot places her trusted high-exchange individuals in.  Each year, regardless of overall happiness or performance of pilots these positions attract stock options and a bigger pay rise than the rest.  Where the dysfunction comes is that everyone else considers themselves to be the  low-exchange members, and when we see that the scheduler or the training captains are not really living up to their duties, we get more and more upset - especially at reward time.
For example, sometime last year,  one captain who was flying with a training captain was busted by the FAA for flying into DC airspace without authority to do so.  The truth of the matter was it was the training captain acting as SIC that persuaded the captain not to file a flight plan and refused to consider the possibility that he could be wrong.  In the end, the training captain got no punishment, but the PIC has a violation on his record for eternity - and yet the training captain got paid extra at bonus time.

It all seemed very unfair.  In addition, unless a training captain drops dead, there are no rotation of duties or chances of replacing him.  Its all seen as wholly unfair by the majority of the pilots, and this is leading to dissent in the ranks.  In fact, the longer it continues, the worse it gets. The solution to the problem is actually very easy - reassign the positions or instigate a system where the bonuses are distributed evenly to the many rather than the few. A rotating position would be the fairest - not only would everyone gain more skills being the scheduler for one or two years, it would promote understanding and cooperation in scheduling limitations among all the crew.

References:

Anderson, D. A. (1998). Using power and influence tactics for better results. Marine Corps Gazette, 82(12), 37-38. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com.ezproxy.libproxy.db.erau.edu/docview/221425514?accountid=27203

Yukl, G. (2013). Leadership in Organizations. (8th ed., pp. 63-72.). Upper Saddle River, NJ:
Pearson-Prentice Hall.