The "bigger" picture of the Process Theory

Hello everyone,

This week we ‘tune’ in on what the Process Theory entails and different models along the way. So what is this so-called ‘Process Theory’? Basically what it is can be known as the reciprocal theory in which leadership is more conclusive to the followers and the leader as a whole. A model known as the Relational Model is composed of five different segments including purpose, inclusive, empowering, ethical, and process. Here is a simple breakdown of each:
1. Purpose- the shared value or vision of the group as a whole
2. Inclusive- a sense of ‘we’ different people and different points of view
3. Empowering- through others generate a sense of empowerment to essentially ‘motivate’ each other
4. Ethical- basically means making moral decisions
5. Process- the way the group goes about to achieve goal(s), how they communicate, and plan and steps in doing so

So the way this concept works is by following through with each of the above terms. As you can see, process, encompasses the whole imaginatively by keeping track of the ‘teams’ progression. It is also important to note that there is no ‘end goal’ in this model, but perhaps each individual has a personal goal they may want to get out of the whole thing. Essentially, the means do not justify the end in this rare case scenario. For example, this relates to my life in the exact way how my program Blue Chip is doing. All of the above terms correlate with how the program is run in being that everyone works together, in class, in projects, and in the community, but each one may want to get something different out of it than others. Perhaps one may do service to get a letter of recommendation, or one may want the satisfaction of helping people in general. I feel this purpose of me being a part of this program is to get a better understanding of leadership, help my community, and generate a strong portfolio for future job positions.
The other model described was the “Social Change” Model in which it is inclusive, views leadership as a process rather than a position, promotes the values of equity, social justice, self-knowledge, personal empowerment, citizenship and service. In other words, the term can encompass concepts as broad as revolution and paradigm shift, to narrow changes such as a particular cause within small town government. One of the areas this concept can derive from is in political science. An easy example of how this relates to my life and our generation is the election of President Barack Obama as the nation’s first black president. This marked a ‘huge’ point in history and some even say he is the ‘renewing’ of the Civil Rights movement as it continues throughout this day in society. This makes sense right? This effects me as I m able to witness this social change in time and due to unfortunate events in Tucson, Arizona I was able to see and hear him talk to the public about the tragedy earlier this year. The question of the day is what social change can apply to you?

Behavior and Situational Theories.....

Welcome back,
Today I will be discussing the Behavioral and Situational Trait theories. As mentioned in the earlier blogs these theories are ones that could apply to anyone from past to present. Over the last century studying behavior of leaders has been a primary focus. Some aspects to take into consideration of this concept is that learned behaviors and not predisposed traits are associated with leadership. It can be learned. One commonly used technique to show results is self scoring assessments. It has been proved through research that some behaviors are more related to leaders than non-leaders. Through research these skills continue to appear throughout: technical, human, and conceptual skills. Like the trait approach, the skills approach takes a general consensus of effective leaders. However, according to Northouse the skills approach bases the ideology on that skills are something the leader can accomplish whereas traits are who leaders are.

The first skill is the technical skill which means the knowledge about and proficiency in a specific type of work or activity. For example, I have known many general managers of stores who are high on this skill but may lack other skills. They were very good with numbers and being very ‘micro-managing’ in a sense. My former manager knew what the quota was each day and pushed for the employees to meet it at the end of the business day. The second skill, human, is simple. It essentially means ‘people’ skills; how you work with others and your knowledge in doing so. This can be a very rewarding skill or can create problems with being ‘too’ nice with others and not being focused on the overall ‘grand’ scheme of things (i.e. what you are trying to accomplish). The last is conceptual, which going back to Northouse, means the abilities to work with ideas and concepts. For example, relating to my life, my current manager has exceedingly great conceptual skills pertaining to the layout of new products in given areas of the store. Though the company has pre-designed layouts of certain areas, he has me and others position products on the floor to generate more customers and profitability. The last concept to take into consideration is the Situational Theory which describes itself practically, though there are four underlinings of this including: coaching, supporting, directing, and delegating.

I won’t go into much detail on these because they all ‘speak’ for themselves. However, the one that can be a little more difficult to understand is delegating. What is it? This approach is the members basically run the show; however you are given the title as the group leader with minimal support and direction. You do help, but in the aspect of using each members strengths for the groups own good. I have seen this in many groups especially in high school where our leader would ‘sit-back’ and watch us work, but I believe this can build strong character in the long run. So, what theory do you support and why? Until next time…….

To be or not to be? Extraverted or introverted that is.........

Welcome back,

Today I will be discussing a widely used psychometric assessment questionnaire known as the MBTI (Myers-Briggs Type Indicator). First published in 1962, this assessment composed and based off of Carl Jung’s psychological types, were believed to narrow down how the human mind worked. The key concepts to this were either extraverted or introverted (outspoken vs. within one self) so to speak. When you take this test there are 8 mental functions the test will decide upon based on how you answered the questions to the best of your ability. There are:
- Extraversion
- Introversion
- Sensing
- Intuition
- Thinking
- Feeling
- Judging
- Perceiving
Here I will discuss the concept of extraversion a little more in depth. Now according to dictionary.com, extraversion is “the act of directing one’s interest outward or to things outside the self”. For example, this deals with being outgoing and energetic versus solitary and reserved (like introverted) also being excited and seeking stimulation on others. On the other hand, the concept of introversion is “the direction of or tendency to direct one's thoughts and feelings toward oneself”. For example, this term is pretty much the opposite of extrovert, less out-going, not as sociable, and more likely to thrive with minimum new social contacts. This doesn’t mean the person is asocial either, but you get the point?
How this all relates to me, is that when I took this test I received ESTJ. I can agree with this because it relates to how I am in life. It was broken down in the following order from highest to lowest (descending): Extraverted thinking, introverted sensing, extraverted intuition, introverted feeling, introverted thinking, extraverted sensing, introverted intuition, and extraverted feeling. Well what does this all mean? Here’s the breakdown of (some) it according to our Blue Chip manuals:

- Extraverted thinking (Te): Establishing goals and applying objective analysis to arrive at a logical, defendable decision
- Introverted sensing (Si): Recalling the details of past experiences and reliving the emotions that accompany them
- Extraverted intuition (Ne): Creating possibilities for the future and spontaneously recognizing patterns and connections
- Introverted feeling (Fi): Feeling internal tranquility when reality matches what is uniquely and deeply valued
- Extraverted sensing (Se): Alive in the moment and aware of what the senses are able to immediately experience

Now keep in mind, most likely when you first take the test you will come up with the four letters of the eight words I described above. There is a quite complicated equation you must use to fit those letters in descending order (1-8) to come up with your strongest and weakest mental functions. This relates to me by showing me what my strengths are and what I can ‘improve’ on to be helpful to others. You can take this test online to see what defines you. What I like most about this assessment is that it is different from other tests where as they point out your weaknesses, however this test focuses more on strengths (and what can be worked on). So the question is, how do you function in life; introvert or extravert?

"Are you born a leader?"

Hello everyone,
Thank you for coming once again to my blog where I fill you in on leadership and what it’s all about anyways. Whether you’re in school, holding a job position, or just wanting or thinking about creating charisma for yourself through a newly developed organization, I am here to help. This week we are going to be looking at “The Great Man Theory” and “The Trait Theory”. These two different concepts are very different in a sense that they both contain different guidelines of what leadership meant and in some cases still means today.

As discussed in the previous blog, the concept of “The Great Man Theory” led to the thought that leaders were born to be great. The leaders of the time were politically powerful, wealthy, and royal. What would you say on who you think could fit into this category? Perhaps, Abraham Lincoln or Nelson Mandela who served as the President of South Africa from 1994-1999. His political figure in society has always been one to notice for his great acts to promote a better democratic multi-racial country for his people. Today, he still remains an ‘idol’ among many people from all across the nation. This could be a perfect example on the applied theory mentioned above. The way this would apply to my life would make sense in a way, but I believe that being outspoken could definitely be a contributing quality in which this is something that I am becoming more and more dependent upon. The other conceptual theory was the “Trait Theory”, that in a way lacks a theory altogether. This is because the definition of a great leader was the physical appearance of the person such as the hair, build, height, and so on so forth. Through studies traits arose to make what researchers thought to be “The five top traits for effective leadership” and they were:

-Intelligence
-Self Confidence
-Determination
-Integrity
-Sociability

Now when I look these they do make somewhat sense, but there are many traits that could easily be placed with these. This theory can relate to my life in that when I have been or will be put into a leadership position, it is essential that you look and present yourself in good manner because who wants to follow after some poorly dressed, ‘scruffy’, pessimistic person? I certainly won’t. How about you? What do you define as a good leader?

There have been many theories over the years but on a side note as learned during lecture was the “Achievement Motivation Theory” in which was designed by McClelland where it focuses on how the leaders performance and need for power, achievement, and affiliation. Though this can be seen as a minuscule outlier to the wide spectrum of leadership theories varying from tested, proved, researched, and so forth, the achievement theory may be one that a certain leader goes by. All in all, the essentials of good leadership is what you feel is right and what others view of that in being their purpose to come to reasoning with you in the long term.

picture above (www.black-collegian.com/newsspecial-reports/mandela2000-1st1.shtml)

The good ol' history of leadership.....

Greetings and good day,
This brings upon the second entry of “What is leadership anyway?” Today I will be writing more in depth of leadership and the different theories given the different time periods in which that style was most effective. To date, there has been around five eras of leadership which include: Tribal, Pre-classical, Classical, Progressive, and Post-Progressive. Not to mention the different theories (as written above) behind leadership, meaning what style of leadership those who were given the “label” carried about themselves to best suit them and their “followers”. Have you ever been in a leadership position in which you found yourself going back and forth from the “Great Man Theory” where you believed you were just born as a leader or the “Situational Theory” perhaps? Let’s go ahead and see exactly how this world we live in came around along the time line of leadership (do note that there are many concepts to be gained from reading this).
To start, tribal leadership (which speaks for itself) gives one somewhat of an idea on how the leaders came to be, what their physical qualities were like, or how they contributed to benefit themselves and others. Well, in that time period, the leaders were leaders because of their size, strength, and agility. They posed fear into the eyes of their followers and though the followers were crucial in tribal success, those who did not obey were killed to say the least. The leader knew how the ‘system’ worked, meaning who did what, how to do what, and where to do what. In “layman” terms, he was practically the ‘head-honcho’ of his established tribe. The next in line was the pre-classical era, perhaps in the Renaissance time period where claimed divinity was essential to leadership and kings and queens ruled over the country. Death was feared and majority of the time it was male dominance in which held the leadership positions. Those who viewed the leaders as spiritually or magically endowed can say that this can somewhat correlate to Biblical times concerned with spirituality (prophets for example). The followers were to obey and be spiritually filled for they followed in fear of the leaders. So what about today? You may ask. Let’s pick up the pace a bit and skip forward in time just to see exactly how much the thought of leadership changed. The post-progressive era is the time we are in now where leadership has explored new forms of leading beyond business and profit margins (PowerPoint, 15). The thought of addressing the post –industrial world is relevant to the leader’s point of view. There is a new democratic agenda at hand and answers in which everyone is looking for in a leader. It can be said that the idea of one person being in charge of his or her own is no longer a factor in today’s society, but rather equal partner in the leadership relationship. The follower’s needs are met and the agenda of becoming a better follower leads to the empowerment of the leadership position. With this in mind however, it was a different story for the theories behind leadership can be dated back to the late 1700’s.
During our nations Independence (1776), the “Great Man Theory” was believed that all leaders possessed this quality, not by learning, but they were born with it. This was in their family lineage and it carried with them in time. Moreover, the “Trait Theory” in which was during the early nineteen hundreds to mid nineteen hundreds, the leader had certain traits about him and held a predisposed position in their society such as hair, height, weight, etc.. The “Behavioral Theory” lasted between the 1950’s-1960’s where there was only one best way to lead others and the thought of actually learning this was understandable. The “Situational Theory” lasted around the 1950’s-1980’s and this dealt with the fact that the leader was supposed to adapt to any given situation based on the task at hand. Based on my belief, the situational theory should or would suite me or any other leader because that shows the diversification of the leader. For example, the president comes across many different situations in which people are asking him to do different tasks and he has to adjust to the situation and find out what works best. Last but not least, the “Process Theory” which dates to the 1970’s to the present, in which leadership is a relational and shared process. They (leaders) must conform to the followers needs to create a better place including serving them, leading by example, and focus on the community to create change. I believe this is very relevant alongside with the situational theory because many businesses you can see this in which in turn creates a better work atmosphere for everyone. For example, someone’s boss who works for a major company is open minded to them and sees both sides of their situation. This in turn leaves the worker to stay and work for the boss making the business better and the people around better. Gone are the days when it was about the leader, instead it is about leadership and what it means. In the end, “true self interest teaches selflessness” (Wren, 69). What can be said by this? Ask yourself this question while you go about your days work, for it can prove the enhancement of a better person in you….

The basics of leadership

Hello and good day, my name is Andrew Lopez and I would like to start by thanking you for coming or even following me on my way to bring the latest updates on leadership to the web. Throughout my life I have taken on quite a few leadership roles ranging from academics in high school, to a team leader of the varsity football team, to insuring quality patient care on the ambulance as an EMT. I seemed to have a pretty good idea of what leadership meant, but not once did I contemplate on the history, different types, or even the truisms of the quality. Have you ever been put in a leadership position? What do you define leadership as? As a member of the Blue Chip Program at the University of Arizona, it is required that my peers and I give our insights on what it means to become a ‘leader’. Over the course of 4 years (myself being in the first phase, equivalent to the first year), everyone who takes part in this prestigious program will learn ‘inside and out’ what it takes, means, and the history of leadership and leading in general. At this time we will dive into the basic concepts of leadership.

Leadership can be dated as being one of the oldest preoccupations in history (Wren, 49). Dating as far back as the leaders in the Old and New Testaments, leadership defined, was different than it is now. This definition of the term has changed many times over the years. This being said, the reason being was in correlation with the time period and what major people stood out during those years. The commonality between all these people that emerged into leaders was that they all had a well understanding of who they were such as their values, interests, skills, style, and their mission. Which brings us to the sole and beginning definition (so to speak) of leadership and that is:

1. You have to know who you are as a person

Are you the type of leader that will understand your vision and see ‘eye to eye’ with the public or group of people in whom you are trying to outreach to? It is essential that in order to be the leader you want to be, you have to use the best strategy to work effectively with a group of people (PowerPoint, 2). In other words how to communicate, create powerful teams, use everyone’s skills for the better, work with, and know the strengths and weaknesses of your followers. I never thought of these key aspects when I was in the position of leading another person or a group of people. However, I can say now that these rolls which must be played are indeed vital to becoming a successful leader. Though we may make mistakes in life and bestowing upon the responsibility is no easy task, but it’s the mistakes we learn from that make us better leaders for the future to come. In fact, as mentioned earlier, leadership defined nowadays is the relationship between the leaders and followers with the intent towards a common goal and mutual relationship. This means that in today’s society we are becoming more and more equal with each other coming from all different walks of life, but sharing and helping each other more side by side. In the end, everyone has the responsibility to lead, but when it comes down to it, there is no one best way to lead rather follow your heart, mind, and soul….and sure enough others will be there to help and follow you through your journey of life.