A511.5.3_SeabournBeau

What was the point of the research?After completing the reading, it was clear to me that the point of the research was to help the reader understand the breakdown in leadership communication through electronic means. It became clear that there is a breakdown of participation and follower-ship when a management level  employee was communicating with their subordinates via electronic communication methods, i.e., email or video conferencing. Additionally, there was findings that directly related satisfaction and intellectual stimulation. 

What were the hypotheses?The authors hypothesis included (first study) that "both laissez-faire and management by exception styles may be especially relevant to a remote leadership environment" (Kelloway, 2012). In the second study their hypothesis was "that individuals that were exposed to e-mail messages containing a charismatic or intellectually stimulating message would express higher levels of performance on a laboratory  task than individuals who received e-mail instructions that did not contain these aspects of transformational leadership"(Kelloway, 2012).

What was the research method used?A vignette approach in which groups of students each read one vignette, with one type of leadership message embedded. Using the outcome, they were able to determine the divergent validity. In the second study "data was collected from 105 undergraduate psychology students at a Canadian university. Each participation received two bonus points towards their course grade in return for participation"(Kelloway, 2012). This included a problem solving exercise and reading a short scenario to collect data.

Were the results supportive of the research goals?In case one, they found that there was a direct relation to satisfaction and interpersonal justice. The data being so detailed and number orientated, it was hard to determine if there was any actual substantial findings for this case study. Personally, I believe that they did actually find some correlation between the research points they looked into. Case two; they found that there was no change in the way readers responded to the e-mails. They basically found what they predicted, people reacted to the e-mail based on the content. This would lead me to conclude that people respond to the information that they read, even in an e-mail.

Of what value was the research?I think there was substantial value to the research. With the ever changing business plans of companies and the need to utilize technology more, there has to be value to this research. Basically what I'm taking away from this week is that there is not always an upside to communicating with your employees via electronic communication or inter personal methods. There is value in being able to physically interact with your employees. Each research piece presented to us this week laid out that people respond better when their leader is with them in the "fight". How can someone be included as a leader when they're video conferencing and e-mailing. Just as the example talked about the CEO, there were negative downsides from his reaction to the people coming and going to early.There was no positive from being scolded over an e-mail platform. In my additional research, they mention giving your team some space to see them grow. They state "Give your team some space, trust them, and you might be impressed by what they’re able to achieve (Hendricks, 2014). What i think he means there is that people need space as in room to work, not physical space. People and employees need to know that their leader is just as involved as they are in any situation. That cannot happen in an electronic environment.

Hendricks, D. (2014, January 27). 6 Ways To Empower Your Employees With Transformational Leadership. Forbes. Retrieved July 2, 2014, from http://www.forbes.com/sites/drewhendricks/2014/01/27/6-ways-to-empower-your-employees-with-transformational-leadership/

Kelloway, K., Barling, J., Kelley, E., Comtois, J., & Gatien, B. Remote Transformational Leadership. . Retrieved July 1, 2014, from https://erau.blackboard.com/bbcswebdav/pid-14787878-dt-content-rid-25229761_4/institution/Worldwide_Online/MSLD_Courses/MSLD_511/Word/Remote_transformational_leadership.pdf

A511.4.3_SeabournBeau

 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?

 This week we were presented with insight on how to look within ourselves and others for important traits and abilities. In my reading, I learned that there are areas in which managers can be quite strong and areas in which managers can improve. Managers can have a strong emotional intelligence and be able to harness their feelings into something constructive. On the other hand, a manager might be weak in a social setting or in their social intelligence. Having the ability to understand the situation you're in and then make an appropriate response can be a difficult task and attribute to master. Knowing that you should not be emotional is one thing, but if a situation calls for empathy and understanding, you as a leader, need to know how to handle that situation. The combination of attributes and effectiveness allows people to become better leaders. If you can determine the role you're in and then effectively apply leadership skills to that role, you can ultimately have leadership success.

To access myself, I feel as though I have a good sense of self-awareness and good interpersonal skills. I believe that I can relate to people and or recognize a situation, and try to apply my leadership skills appropriately. I do have a slight weakness in the emotional intelligence department. I tend to wear my emotions on my sleeve, which can hinder my ability to effectively lead and control the situation I am in. It would be in my best interest to try and detach myself emotionally from some of the situations that I can get involved in. Sometimes I tend to allow other people to influence me with their emotions also. Although that is not always bad, I have to be better at trying to limit the amount of emotional energy I put into one situation.

Lastly, if I were to become more level headed and less emotional, I could become a better leader. That would allow me to make more clear decisions and apply learned knowledge to a situation without getting to upset or angered. If my employer knew that I could be level headed, that could increase my credibility and the potential for future promotions. Relating to the cognitive resource theory, being a boss who limits the pressure on his workers could lead to a better organization and better work results.

A511.3.3_SeabournBeau

Demonstrate your knowledge of the theory of power and influence

Power and influence are all around us,used by each and every person. Understanding that principle can be rewarding or it can be a negative. Mostly however, the people that know how to utilize power and influence are much more successful and they can choose methods to help themselves and their company succeed. The ability to understand people and their strengthens and weaknesses allows leaders to be most effective. In the reading it mentioned that if a company is in major need or change, there may be more need for a powerful leader. When a leader is to powerful however, they simply forget to use skills such as persuasion and consultation (Yukl, 2013). There are several different ways to use power, those are dictated by specific situations and personnel. Likewise, the ability to show influence is equally important. People need a boost sometimes. Like power, there are a number of ways in which someone can influence a person or situation. In order for a leader to be effective, they need to demonstrate the ability to both use their power effectively and influence people or situations when needed.


Reflect on the power that you personally bring to your work place; 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?

For me personally, there are some circumstances that allow me to be in a power role. One of those being when I'm in charge of a tower cab and all the airport operations. I feel that legitimate power is gained here. In these situations, I'm in a work power role. I'm directly responsible for everything that is happening. Although I am not the overall boss, in these cases, I'm in charge. Second, have an expertise allows me the ability to have some expert power. In some cases, there are questions that get brought up about technique or knowledge. In those cases and when my boss is unavailable, I can step into the power role. Offering my expertise on a specific situation. Lastly, when I'm running the tower, I am in an ecological power position. Here, i am in charge of everything, like mentioned before. That means that I have all of the abilities needed to run technological sources and that gives me the ability to influence other tower team members.

I feel as though those power traits are helping shape me as a leader. Understanding that they are actual traits and that I can specifically try to change my approach to them has helped me become a better follower. As odd as that might sound, I can better understand my boss's approach even if he doesn't understand the techniques he's using. By me identifying them, I can choose which one of those will help make me a better leader. When I do have the opportunity to lead a group, I will be able to apply my gained knowledge and apply techniques that I have observed as successful in the past. This ultimately makes me a stronger leader without having to actually be in the leadership role.

A511.2.3_SeabournBeau

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?

So after this week's reading, and to be honest, I don't or haven't intentionally used any of these techniques. At least not in the sense that I knew about them and then applied them. I would however say that I have used some of them indirectly. Here are some examples:

Observe operations directly - Being an air traffic controller, I have the opportunity to monitor and evaluate people as they move through our evaluation process. With that in mind, I am often in the postilion to monitor the operations and the procedures being implemented at our facility. Although I am not in a leadership role, I am able to offer my criticisms and praises when they come. Likewise, my coworkers do the same. That makes us stronger controllers in general.

Show acceptance and positive regard - I have been on both sides of this particular guideline. In the Navy, I was a supervisor in the tower. There were many times when people more senior to me, were having a hard time grasping the whole air traffic control concept. I think it meant a lot to them when someone would take the time and tell them that they have the abilities they need to be successful and that you want them on your tower team. On the flip side, those people were often supportive of me being promoted and would help me in that perspective. In both cases, we each helped the overall goal of the team.

Be willing to help with personal problems - I wasn't sure if this actually happened in the actual business world. This is actually, to me, one of the best techniques a leader can employ to help his business or position succeed. How can someone be successful or succeed if they're to occupied with third party concerns? I think to be successful you have to show that you're willing and able to help coworkers and subordinates succeed. If a company is willing to help one worker, all of the workers see that and might in turn help the business thrive.

To finalize, there were some techniques that I learned this week that I could try and utilize to be more successful in the future. I could do a way better job of bolstering people's self-esteem and confidence. I, like other people wanted to get ahead in life. I personally believe that I have probably hurt some people's feelings or not boosted people up when I should have. I'm not saying I did that intentionally, I think it was the nature of the environment I was in. I need to try and be aware of other people's feeling and help them succeed. If I was more willing to help other people, they might be willing (or others) might be more willing to help me later.

A511.1.3_SeabournBeau

 For this assignment I want to select Joel Osteen. To start, I think that he is both inspiring as an individual and I support the cause in which he enlisted people's attention. There are a few reasons that I think he is exceptionally effective and why is church as a business is abundantly successful. First, prior to him being the main focus of attention at the church and taking over the role of leader pastor, he worked in a management role behind the scenes. The reason this key fact is important is because he was not simply selected to become a leader. He was actually able to appreciate the hard work that people are putting in to help make his church successful. In a recent sermon, he mentions that there is an actual difference in the needs and roles of everyone at the church. He said that the ushers are just as important as the pastor who is just as important and the congregates. There are roles that people have to fill in each organization. In his current role, Joel is the spokesperson and the resource allocator. I would assume just like anyone, he has some issues with making sure the church runs smoothly. That is particularly hard to do the fact that he is a large attraction and the church has grown exponentially since his take over as head pastor.

I personally think that there is a fine line in the leadership to management communication. The leadership cannot force ineffective processes down to the managers and then expect them to always succeed. What I mean is, if a person in a leadership role makes a decision about something involving change in the organization, they have to take responsibility for its success and failure. Sometimes there seems to be a breakdown after processes are implemented and often times the lower management personnel are blamed for it not succeeding. Ultimately, I think that the intersection of management and leadership is a tough one. There will always be  conflicts and personality issues; I think, like Southwest, you have to find something that allows people to relate to success and then try and emulate that business plan. Sometimes the oddest ideas can make a company successful. I think that is why Joel Osteen is so effective. He doesn't follow what some pastors do. He actually only speaks about the happiness people can receive and the good things that can happen with God. He breaks the mold from what other pastors do. I think that the managers learn from that and they make things successful as well.

A521.9.4_SeabournBeau

I found this book in general to be very helpful. Chapter 12 is no different. I found the information to be very helpful. The first topic I'm selecting is a leader who participates. I've recently come across a lot of visual references to this particular point. The pictures show a man watching a yelling at people as one form of leadership and the second picture shows the man pulling the rope with the employees. I think that's a great way to describe what is going on. Moving forward, I want to be the leader that is pulling the rope with the employees. It's easy and lax to just watch people do work. It's easy to do nothing and yell. It's harder to be in charge and do work!

Next is the leader who is like a conversation. I've seen it time and time again, a leader who is never wrong and who never can take responsibility for anything. I think the open door policy combined with the equal playing field approach allows leaders to be most effective. I would implement this by basically telling the people under me that I'm always open to suggestion and review as long as it is not malicious or ill intended. Allowing your employees to come to you with issues and to cut back on gossip could be the difference of you being an effective leader or not. After all, you're only as good as your weakest link right?

Lastly, I would like to discuss the leadership set that fits the modern need. I don't think there is anything worse sounding then the Apollonian approach to business. I think that that comes out of the size of a company, at least that's what the reading mentioned. I think that there has to be a way around that situation. A manger or someone in upper leadership should be able to dictate how things are done. I think the last thing people want is to feel unimportant and useless. If a company does not address the need of one individual, how can it be successful or important. I think the last 10 years have shown how the gap between management and generalized workforces have moved apart. While struggling to make ends meet, the employees are not getting any attention while the company leaders were getting huge bonuses. That has to end and in order to grow, you must identify with people at every level.

A521.8.4_SeabournBeau

So this is an interesting question that could be answered different ways based on what type of situation I am put in. Generally though, I do not have a problem making conversation with strangers.  With that said, I am also not the guy that will randomly talk to someone a lot in a short encounter. Here is an example; last week I was waiting for an elevator. While I was waiting a man just starting talking to me for no apparent reason about a non-related topic. I believe it was about the NBA playoffs. The reason I thought it was funny was because we only were waiting for that elevator for maybe 30 seconds. So am I that extreme, no. I would however strike up a conversation in the event that there may be some extended period of time I might be around someone or perhaps to break the silence of the room. Sometimes I find it very uncomfortable to have complete silence in a room. Most of the time I can't stand it and I swear I would talk to myself if I had to.

To the second part of this question, I think I'm able to adapt to a situation and talk to random people for a couple of reasons. First, growing up, I moved a lot. The constant school hopping and what not created the ability to get to know people quickly. Second would be that I don't like be ignored. I'm not sure why. I would prefer to sit and have lunch with someone and talk to them verse sitting alone and reading a paper. I'm not the guy on the plane in the seat next to you who is completely silent. We're going to talk. Making contact is not difficult for me. I have been known to use icebreakers, trust me there are many woman out there that laughed at me for that! Self disclosure is also something that I use a lot of. To be honest, I feel as though I'm pretty transparent. When my friends talk about finances or something like that, I'm totally open about everything. I read awhile back that if friends and peers shared information they deemed "personal" more often with one another, they would learn a ton! I feel as if I am open about things, people might feel like they can trust me and that I'm not trying to be a weasel. I think that it has to be an important leadership skill to approach people and get things started. After all, that's what leaders need to be able to do! LEAD!