Defining the Leadership - Assignment Example

? LM3 Lecturer: Introduction Leadership is a process that involves person ability to influence the activities of others to move towards your desired direction (Denhardt, Denhardt & Aristigueta, pp194-197). The various sources of power that helps a leader to influence activities of others, they include; coercive poer, referent power, reward power, personal power, expert power to name just but a few (Denhardt, Denhardt & Aristigueta, pp 246). This study aims at providing an insight on the following areas: Chapter seven 1. What characteristics in the social environment make it particularly difficult to define or exhibit leadership? What do the authors mean when they refer to future leadership as more shared, a process, and about doing the right thing? The major characteristics that make it difficult to define leadership include; people from both public and private organization barely know the components of leadership whether it exist or it doesn’t. According to Denhardt, Denhardt & Aristigueta, p-189 “leadership is becoming one of the most widely debated but least clearly understood concepts” Secondly people have not yet understood that leadership has become so dynamic whereby, society has been described as “highly turbulent subject to sudden and dramatic shift” (Denhardt, Denhardt & Aristigueta, pp-189). Thirdly, people have not yet understood leadership requires corporation among all the concern parties, whereby, according to Denhardt, Denhardt & Aristigueta, pp-190, “Moreover, clients or citizens also want to participate, as well they should”. Additionally, lack some aspect of creativity and innovativeness with respect to leadership style has made it quite challenging to define leadership (Denhardt, Denhardt & Aristigueta, pp-190-192). This is because leadership style that may be applied in a particular organization may not be effective in another organization. Additionally, different organizations have different structures and may require different leadership styles (Denhardt, Denhardt & Aristigueta, pp-189-195). In above connection, future leadership is more of a shared process because current leadership was build based on the past leadership theories. This is according to Denhardt, Denhardt & Aristigueta, p-190 “we need to understand how leadership has been studied and practiced in the past”. Therefore, through past leadership, future leadership can have a reference point as well as a fundamental base of formulating the appropriate leadership styles to be applied in future organizations (Denhardt, Denhardt & Aristigueta, pp 189-192). However, it is important to consider that “leadership is changing in many ways, and we should be attentive to those changes” (Denhardt, Denhardt & Aristigueta, pp-190). In above connection, it can be scrutinized that, “In the past, a leader was considered the person who held a formal position of power in an organization or a society” (Denhardt, Denhardt & Aristigueta, p-190). However, through evolution of leadership, people have come to understand that leadership is a process that requires corporation and integration among all people within and outside the organization (Denhardt, Denhardt & Aristigueta, pp190-193).Additionally, leadership has taken a certain angle, whereby, decision makers should not only involve people from top management but should also involve those from lower levels of management (Denhardt, Denhardt & Aristigueta, pp 190-195).This is because when everybody is involved in decision making, people feel that they own those decision(Denhardt, Denhardt & Aristigueta, pp 190-195 2. How to our text authors define “moral imagination”? When is this to be used? Why? What does it involve? The author has employed the concept of moral imagination to explain what moral leadership entails as well as moral issues. According to Denhardt, Denhardt & Aristigueta, pp 224-225, moral imagination entails “not just heightening attention to moral con-cerns, but rather carefully and thoughtfully understanding and evaluating various options from a moral point of view” .Connectively, moral imagination involves employing a critical thought by weighing the available alternatives from amoral perspective (Denhardt, Denhardt & Aristigueta, pp 224-225).The author has put forth some ideas to substantiate the aspect of moral imagination, some of the ideas include: applying the aspects of moral imagination in collecting information and ideas from different sources rather than relying on a single source and creating sense out it “synthesizing mind is able to bring together information and ideas from many different sources in a way that makes sense” (Denhardt, Denhardt & Aristigueta, pp-224). On the other hand, moral imagination may involve leading and making decision based on welfare of others rather than personal gains (Denhardt, Denhardt & Aristigueta, pp 222-227). Connectively, moral imagination may utilize the aspect of making decisions through acknowledgement of other people thoughts. Whereby, according Denhardt, Denhardt & Aristigueta, pp 225 “respectful mind recognizes and celebrates the differences among individuals”. Additionally, moral imagination may further involve coming out with a new idea on how to do things differently (Denhardt, Denhardt & Aristigueta, pp 225-239). On the contrary, moral imagination may be based on those people who makes decision based on others thoughts without deviating to other sources (Denhardt, Denhardt & Aristigueta, pp 225-229). Moral imagination may be widely utilized in managerial decision making process as well as individual decisions (Denhardt, Denhardt & Aristigueta, pp 225-231). Managers employ moral imagination to weigh available option and to determine whether the action to be undertaken hat they may benefits to the organization or not (Denhardt, Denhardt & Aristigueta, pp 225-231). Additionally, through moral imagination, decision makers can be able to solve critical problems that might be facing their organization (Denhardt, Denhardt & Aristigueta, pp 225-231). This in turn may help an organization to take proactive measure to prevent exposing the company against risk exposures (Denhardt, Denhardt & Aristigueta, pp 226-231). Therefore, it can be scrutinized that Moral imagination may not only employed by corporate managers in decision making but also by individuals in making personal decisions (Denhardt, Denhardt & Aristigueta, pp 225-231). Chapter eight 3. Create a table that lists each of the following scholars in the first column – Haire, Hofstede, Cyert & March, Thompson, Allison. In columns 2, 3, and 4 place (a) the time writing, (b) his/her definition of power, and (c) his/her core ideas about power. Then, at the end of the table summarize how both (b) and (c) have changed across time. (a)Time(Year) (b)Definition of power (c) Core Ideas 1962/1989 Haire defined power as the inclusion of every individual in decisions making process rather than leaving decisions to be made by one person he further asserted that “power and authority are an inherent right of management remained”(Denhardt, Denhardt & Aristigueta, 244). Haire was against traditional approach on power. Additionally, Haire was not for the idea of traditional approach of management that considers employees as lazy who must be directed and forced to work in order to achieve results. He held that there should be equity in terms of distribution of power distribution (Denhardt, Denhardt & Aristigueta, 2013). 2005 Hofstede defined power as a distance that exists between those in authority and those who are not. “Power distance is “the extent to which the less powerful members of institutions and organizations within a country expect and accept that power is distributed unequally” (Denhardt, Denhardt & Aristigueta, p-244). Hofstede brought forth the idea of having power as a distance that exist between those in authority and those who are not in a position of authority, whereby, those who are in authority anticipate to give commands to their juniors and their juniors are anticipated to comply without questioning(Denhardt, Denhardt & Aristigueta, 244). March 1963 Cyert & March defined power as the anticipation by individual to receive attention from other members of the organization. According to “Cert & March discredited the then prevailing view of organizations as economically rational in their decision- making process and promoted the idea that organizations were political entities” (Denhardt, Denhardt & Aristigueta, pp 244). Cyert & March Asserted that organizations are not economically rational decision making bodies but rather are politically independent firms where power is centered towards one individual within an organization. 1967 Thompson defined power as the opposite of dependency. “Power is the opposite of dependency; organizations will seek to minimize dependency arising from the environment” (Denhardt, Denhardt & Aristigueta, pp 244-245). According to Thompson, traditional approaches of leadership do not hold any basis. This is because it alleged that only one person in the whole organization has the powers. Additionally, Thompson further asserted that every individual in an organization may possess some form of power. Therefore, power may not be derived from a position that one is holding in an organization (Denhardt, Denhardt & Aristigueta, pp 244-245). 1971 Allison defined power by “use three alternative model in explaining organizational behavior as the outcome of power struggles between key actors over preferred outcomes” (Denhardt, Denhardt & Aristigueta, p-245). Allison used three major models to explain the concept of power namely; rational model, government and organization model. However, more emphasis was placed on government political model. This model asserts that, power is a struggle between the participants with an aim of achieving some desired level of outcomes (Denhardt, Denhardt & Aristigueta, pp 244-245). Summary for b and c Based on the above, it can be scrutinized that the ancient definition strongly asserts that power should based on position that one holds. Additionally, people at the lower levels of management did not have power but rather they were supposed to receive commands from the top management without questioning (Denhardt, Denhardt & Aristigueta, p-244). . Connectively, traditional leadership indicates that people from lower levels of management were not involved in decision making. On the contrary, this notion has changed over the recent time as organization encourage views from lower levels of management making the aspect of power to be evenly distributed within an organization (Denhardt, Denhardt & Aristigueta, 244-248). Application Exercises 1. Take the Leadership Style questionnaire on pp. 193-194. Report your Task and Relationship scores. Explain how these scores may be reflected in your management style. The scores were computed by finding the aggregate total of all the scores in order to determine whether my managerial styles were task oriented or relationship oriented. Connectively, a scale was established to determine where the two aspects fall within the scale. The scores between 10-29 were classified as low; while those that lies between 30-39 were classified as moderate and those that were between 40-50 were classified as high (Denhardt, Denhardt & Aristigueta, 2013). Therefore, it can be scrutinized that the scores between10-29 indicated that management style was relationship oriented. On the other hand, scores between30-39 indicated that there were some great improvements on my style of management. Finally a score between40-50 indicated that my managerial style was very effective because it was able to strike a balance between task and relationship. 2. Take the Transactional versus Transformational Leadership questionnaire on pp. 232-233. Report your scores for Tf and Ta. How is your management style affected by these scores? The circled items were given 5 point each starting from number one to ten for each item selected(either a or b) while uncircled items were given 2.5 points for item recorded(either a or b). The totals score for transaction leadership were recorded separately from those that portrayed transformation leadership style. Based on this exercise it was found that the total scores for transformation leadership were higher with a difference of 25points from those that portrayed transactional leadership. The difference of 25 points was obtained by subtracting total scores for those points that represented transactional leadership to those that presented transformation leadership style. The difference indicates that I applied transformational style of leadership. 3. Read the “Leadership when no one is in charge” case study on pp. 234-35. Answer the questions at the end of the case study in the “Analysis” portion and then explain how your analysis can help you understand “group projects” in graduate classes better. Questions and answers for the case study; (a)Who was the leader of the group? Gina was the leader of the group. (b)What made this person a leader? This is because Gina was able to influence and direct other members to move towards a particular direction whereby, all the members agreed and liked her idea (Denhardt, Denhardt & Aristigueta, pp 234-235). (c)What behaviors were most helpful to the group and which were least helpful? Unity, and respect for each other were the most helpful behaviors among the group members. However, the group displayed some form of laziness and lack of corporation for instance Jennifer opened the cell phone and walked out of the room when the discussion was still going on (Denhardt, Denhardt & Aristigueta, pp 234-235). (d)In the context of “leadership energizes” what happened to energize this group? Understanding the group interest and providing them what they like made Gina to energize the group. It can be scrutinized that the group likes holidays and fun (Denhardt, Denhardt & Aristigueta, pp 234-235). (e)How much involved rational intelligence? In the third last conversation the group displayed rational intelligence by holding complex thoughts and coming up with a solution for instance; cyndia reminded Ralph about the idea that Gina had put forth during the onset of their conversation (Denhardt, Denhardt & Aristigueta, pp 234-235). (f)How much involved emotional intelligence? On the other hand, at the onset of group brainstorming session all members did not have an idea of how they could have go through the task. But through emotional intelligence commonly referred to wisdom, Gina was able to come up with an idea on how to under take the task (Denhardt, Denhardt & Aristigueta, pp 234-235). (g)What does your experience tells you about leadership in the groups when no one is in change? The analysis helps me to conduct my graduate group projects because the above analysis forms a fundamental basis for evaluating the variables under investigation. Additionally, the analysis helps to analyze qualitative data and quantitative and give some recommendations thereafter. 4. Take the power exercise on pp. 238-239. Report your score. Explain why you think you scored as you did. The scores were determined by selecting a TRUE or a FALSE answer starting from number one to twenty. The totals for all the scores that represented TRUE’S were found to be 14 and were all representing odd numbers for each point selected while those that represented False were 6. Whereby, if the number of TRUE’S exceeds FALSE answers, then it implied that power was obtain by employing participatory style of leadership which fallen under a scale of 13-16. On the other hand, if the number of FALSE exceeds TRUE answers then it implied that power was obtained by making employee follow commands without questioning and this was found to fall under a scale of 6-8 in the book. Therefore, I believe I had scored because the total number of TRUE answers exceeded the total number of FALSE and fallen under a scale of 13-16 in the book. 5. Read the case study “Annie’s Dilemma” on pp. 269-270 and report the answers to the questions at the end of the case study. Answers for pg 269-270 1. It can be scrutinized that organization politics were taking place in this case whereby, after Annie was promoted by Esther the managing director, Peter who is the assistant managing director treats Ann unequally. Some of the elements displayed in this case include; political landscape, both formal and informal hierarchy. Additionally, dynamism in power can also be scrutinized as the participants struggle for power for example, Peter and Ann. 2. The other thing that is going on in this case is that, Ann feels intimidated by Peter. Some of the factors that could be contributing to Annie’s problems include: Annie lacks the aspect of believing in her self. This can be scrutinized when she was being promoted; she was not sure whether she could manage the position. This factor can be changed by acting and believing in her self. 3. I can advice Ann to know that she has some powers based on her position and he should use the powers to serve others and avoid being intimidated by peter. She can actually, do this by consulting the managing director rather than to remain silent. Works Cited Denhardt, R. B., Denhardt, J. V., & Aristigueta, M. P. (2013). Managing human behavior in public and nonprofit organizations. Los Angeles: Sage Publications.pp-544. Read More