Leadership and Mentoring, Situational Leadership Model - Essay Example

?While I started to become active in my field, there were a few myths that I had to personally dispel in defining a leader, which I have to mention before I discuss leadership literature in this paper: First, though each person is unique and that each leader has his or her own way in leading others, there is still a core of behaviors, values and characteristics that truly makes a leader great. These are the foundations that make each and every leader the firm and principled individuals that people would want to look up to. Second, leaders are not static and by virtue are great movers of society. It is their responsibility to make use of what they have and meet the needs and wants of the future. Third, strategic direction is crucial to being a leader and having a vision and mission is what operationally makes a leader succeed or fail. Strategy weighs heavy on the “how” and “why” and less so on the “where” hence it is important to have a mission and a vision that is in line with each other. Corollary to this, after planning and goal setting, leaders get things done as plans and goals are not much use if they do not materialize. Fourth and personally the most important for me, leaders naturally need to influence others and have friends that they have purposely nurtured. Admittedly, every leader requires great people around them who when challenged, take up the call, and make the most out of it. Many testimonials on being a leader state that the first step to being a successful leader is to know thyself. Self-understanding has always been the springboard of any leader and a lack of self-awareness is the simplest way to fail in one’s career. For this reason, I applied to myself a leading and useful tool for understanding and training self-awareness, personal development, and improving interpersonal dynamics in a team or an organization: the Johari Window Model. This model, developed by Joseph Luft and Harry Ingham in the 1950’s focus on soft or broad skills and behavior empathy from four different perspectives or spaces: 1) What is known by the person about him or herself and is also known by others; 2) What is unknown by the person about him or herself but which others know; 3) What the person knows about him or herself that others do not know; and 4) What is unknown by the person about him or herself and is also unknown by others. In the assumption that the leader is new in a team, the open free space or the first space is small because shared awareness is relatively small. As the leader becomes better established and known, the size of a leader’s first space increases while the other three areas decrease through feedback, self-discovery and shared discovery [Chapman 2003]. The diagram for the Johari Window is below: Picking from the 56 Johari adjectives that are the possible descriptions of a participant, my personal Johari window that I tried to conduct with my peers and myself include the following: In the open area, the following adjectives include warm, smart, reflective, happy, helpful and intelligent. In my blind area, my peers wrote shy, introverted, nervous, observant, patient, self-conscious. In the hidden area, I wrote bold, brave, complex, confident, energetic, logical, loving, responsive, spontaneous and witty. All the other 56 adjectives not used in the other three areas are still in the unknown area. What I can definitely say about my Johari window model is that I have so much room to grow because of the fact that I still have a very large unknown area. There is also the fact that some of the adjectives that people know about me are disconnected from the adjectives that I know about myself but others don’t know about me. People see me as shy, quiet and introverted, but with honesty, I can say that I am not any of those when I am with people that I am familiar with. In a sense, I know now that I am not yet established as a member as I am starting with a relatively small open are because of the little knowledge known about me. Second, I can expand my open area and transfer some of the adjectives from the hidden quadrant to it by spending time with my other peers and becoming more familiar with them. Perhaps, I still have some sensitivities and fears of what others might think of me; I will have to work on these nevertheless. Of course, constant feedback solicitation will be important, thus making communication perhaps the most immediate goal of my leadership style right now. Lastly, shared activities with a culture of openness, honesty, optimism and constructivism with my peers will help me discover more about myself as a leader. Ultimately, the Johari Window model taps on assessing people’s behavior, management styles, attitudes and potentials, which focuses on emotional intelligence (EQ). The model is encompassing in the sense that it tackles both the leader and the people surrounding him or her. Tackling EQ reduces stress for individuals and organizations by decreasing conflict, improving relationships, stability and harmony, while at the same allowing room for individual growth through discovery. Winston Churchill is often quoted saying that “courage is rightly considered the foremost of the virtues, for upon it all others depend” [Tracey 2008]. When I was faced with hard choices, while others would rather take the easiest choice, I stood up for my own principles, and acted accordingly knowing that I would bear the consequences. Christine Riordan, the dean of the Daniels College of Business at the University of Denver states that a recent study of IBM of 1,500 global chief executives indicated that the greatest issue facing them was escalation of complexity and its not a matter of knowledge, ability or skill that brings success but rather the ability to deal with pressure and stress of competition, fatigue and failure- the kind that we learn from sports [Riordan 2010]. A tough and determined leader will always see it through to achieve the outcome that he knows is right. In relation to acting accordingly, the model by which I would like to evaluate myself is through the model of John Adair, who in 1979 was appointed as the world first Professor of Leadership Studies at the University of Surrey: the Action Centered Leadership model. According to Adair, there a three elements to all leadership situations. These include: 1) The achievement of a goal or task, whether the completion of a practical activity or an intangible goal; 2) The group of people performing the task where it can be assumed that a task will be effectively achieved when all members of a group work together for the common good; and 3) Each individual member who has their own personality and identity. In a venn diagram that coincides with each other, the middle space where all these three elements are considered before doing an action is considered the space for balanced actions, as an effective leader knows that if any one element- task, group or individual- is ignored, the others are unlikely to succeed. Knowing however that the three elements may conflict each other, depending on the situation, one may put particular emphasis on a certain element. I remember doing thus when a professor had to inspect a certain project of ours within a few weeks time. As a large project of ours with minimal team members working on it, it had a number of problem areas that were likely to receive poor grades, in particular design and its relation to the overall goal of the project. With a very short timeframe available, I would be unable to make substantial changes I have in view for the longer term. For example, developing a more strategic and novel way of communicating with other members during the planning process (Group) and taking the pressure off the acting committee head of design, currently struggling, by recruiting someone with more experience into the post (Indvidual) will have to be postponed. I knew then that I had to focus on ensuring that my project showed itself from the best perspective in front of our professors. I had work hard with my other group members, having some sleepless nights, to ensure everything was in place- logistics have been taken care of, audiences have been ushered in well, while all the other members were briefed so that each member gives a consistent story in our presentation (Task). Documentation was also taken care of, and everyone involved in the inspection made sure everything was smoothed out. Once the inspection was over, I can begin again to focus on other aspects in a more balanced way, getting to know individual strengths and weakness, and building an effective team. But at that very moment, I had to focus on task and to prioritize a lot of task considerations before group and individual considerations. Aldair’s model main benefit is the practicality of its design; it provides concrete examples of what the different elements may look like in practice. Also, it provides a basis for emphasizing an element of a leader situation in which prioritizing may come as a specific task in difficult scenarios. As a team leader and supervisor, one of the most important skills I have learned is to delegate work to others. The more I delegate the work, the more time I will have to manage people and improve processes. In order to delegate effectively, I use the STAR method to make sure that the person is provided with four things: Skill, Time, Authority and Responsibility. Skill means that one must have the ability to do the task at hand but this doesn’t mean they have to be as good as the task as me, as I can give them more time to do it, as I would otherwise have available to do it. Time means I must ensure that the person has adequate time to complete the task at the pace that is in tune with their ability, considering that they may have other tasks to do. Authority means ensuring that other people know that the person I am delegating to has been given the authority to complete a task, thus telling people that this person may need information or support. Lastly, responsibility is the hardest to ascertain, as I make sure that the person I delegate has to understand that they are responsible for the task. A best way to impart responsibility is to make sure that I share the credit for the successful outcome of a project or a task. For example, in being the head of project design the most important “skill” I had to consider was a person’s experience and research skills. If the person has less experience, I can give him or her more time to do a task. Since another inspection is unlikely, I can have a constructive outlook in the medium to long term and thus take my time in choosing the head and giving a longer timeframe to do a task. I had to ensure that I also gave him the authority to ensure that his task will be complete thus I made sure that if individual feedback from the whole group is needed through a survey, then the group must fulfill the survey faithfully. Lastly, it is my personal responsibility to make it very clear that I will share the credit we get for a successful outcome in the next presentation of our project. Finally, when a task is completed, one of the simplest methods in evaluation that also has a behavioral approach is the STAR method, which is mainly a behavioral-based interview question format. I am also apt to apply this method to myself in some of my briefs as a leader and the STAR method includes the following components: Situation, Task, Action and Result. Situation describes the situation where a task needs to be accomplished including specific events such as a project at the university or volunteer experience. Task is simply the goal that a person is working for. Action describes the concrete steps that a person takes with an appropriate amount of detail and the particular contribution of a person. Last and most importantly, result describes that outcome of the actions that a person has done including the accomplishments and learning’s, containing multiple positive results. This method is a structured way of evaluation, which focuses on the accomplishments of a person. Mentoring, on the other hand, generally deals with imparting wisdom and sharing knowledge with a less experienced colleague or person, much like a teacher handles a class or an entrepreneur manages staff, customers and suppliers. Intrinsically linked to being a leader, in order to support and encourage people to manage their own learning and maximize their potentials, one must understand what really motivates a person, and to an extent, set effective ways by which one can monitor progress and offer appropriate rewards aside from usual motivation techniques. The crux of mentoring is that they do not so much direct or restrict their mentees, but instead offer support, guidance and assistance, essentially through motivation. The prime model of motivational knowledge is Abraham Maslow’s hierarchy of needs, which represent an arrangement that ranks people or concepts from highest to lowest, commonly represented as a pyramid [College of the Redwoods 2010]. According to Maslow, individuals must meet the needs at the lower levels of the pyramid before they can be successfully motivated to tackle the next levels. From the bottom up, the levels are the following: 1) physiological needs or basic survival needs such food, water, and shelter; 2) safety or keeping needs such as safety, security and order; 3) love, belonging and social needs such as friendship and support; 4) esteem needs such as status, responsibility and a place in the hierarchy; and 5) self-actualization needs such as fulfilling ones potential, which is specific to each individual, or doing things simply because one wants to. In general, this framework has helped me to understand people and what really motivates them. I have met people who barely have anything, which include a house and food, and because of this, they are unlikely to be motivated by tasks that carry mainly status, or those that appeal to esteem needs. Consequently, I have also met people who comes from a wealthy family, and they are unlikely to be motivated by tasks that may have high pay but no prospects for the future that would allow them to be perfect their skills. In my experience as well, some people may welcome the sense of belonging to a certain clique or club, where they can socialize outside work and value the acceptance of others. Other people, however, may already have strong cultural, religious, or social ties and have little or no interest anymore in socializing with others or participating in social events in the university. Though many economists and psychologists have criticized this model since its inception as being ethnocentric or a over generalization, it gives great insight from the perspective of an individual, which dominantly puts emphasis on self-actualization at the top of the one’s needs. The caveat to this model is that once these needs are met, they do not necessarily disappear and may be recurring. To be more accurate, these needs overlap one another and coexist instead of completely replacing each other. Aldair’s previous model is one that has its basis for decision making on the current scenario as a whole. Ken Blanchard and Paul Hersey use a more in-depth solution oriented-model based on certain people when building a strong foundation for an organization- the Situational Leadership Model developed in the 1960’s. The model essentially demonstrates the leadership method depending generally on two things: 1) an individual’s ability on a scale of low to high, which includes their ability to do the job required and not just how long they have been employed; and 2) willingness to do the job on a scale of low to high. The graph would look like the one below: In the Situational Leadership Model, when the person is very willing but lacking in skill and ability, they need support in terms of demonstrations, training and practice. If the person is both wiling and able, then only light coaching is needed for that person to perform well. When a person has both low ability and willingness, they are going to need much directing in the form of orders, supervision and checking. And if the person has already proved his ability but his or her willingness is low, the form of directing that the person needs is in understanding why the task is important and how they will benefit personally by doing well. As a mentor, one should know how to diagnose and implement according to the task (ability) and relationship (willingness) behavior. For example, in choosing a head for the committee on design, there was this particular person who was very willing but had low ability in terms of experience. What I had to provide her was support in terms of demonstrations on how to effectively create a workshop design through research activities which participants may find engaging in the long run. Of course, because the person is new on the post, I had to be instructional, but at the same time let the person have her own creative ideas that she can meld with the larger goal of the project. Connected to the Johari Window model and the team develops maturity and ability, relationships establish, and leadership styles are changed, there is a natural progression of directing style moving from coaching, participating, delegating and almost detached. I placed this is model under mentoring because this entails advancing relational style that involves a clear delineation of authority and ongoing learning, dialog and challenge. Dr. Bruce Tuckman’s four-stage model of team development was published in the 1960’s and emphasizes changing leadership style’s to reflect the growing maturity of the team which includes the following stages: Forming, Storming, Norming, and Performing. Forming is the introduction process, when the team is unsure of its aims, strengths, weakness, and individual roles as team members may be wary but generally accepting each other. To get this stage successfully completed as quickly as possible, it would be useful to hold a forming meeting where everyone introduces himself or herself and share this information. Storming is the stage where familiarity among team members is increasing and may lead to personality clashes between certain individuals for more dominant positions within the team. It is important then that activities that allow people to find their level of comfort are maintained. Norming is the phase where differences among team members are beginning to be ironed out as even though individuals still clash, they are willing to put their differences aside for the sake of group harmony and the larger goal of an organization. Usually, this phase takes a long time because rules will be established by trial and error, and it would be practical to hold a team meeting to set up a formal team charter or agreements. Performing is the last period in which the team has clarity about its purpose, individual roles and responsibility and decision-making is clear and effective within the team with little guidance required from its leader. Conflict still exists but is resolved within the team without interference from its leader and the leader’s role is to delegate more tasks and responsibility within the team. Every group or organization has to go through each of the phases and I personally had to deal with some members that had conflict in terms of ideas to improve the project. It is true however that the one of the foremost problems that I had to deal with is the delegation of tasks as sometimes no one would like to do something. There is a last stage to Tuckman’s model called adjourning when the team’s objectives have been met and the team can disband and move on to new projects with new teams. In terms of being a great leader and mentor, more recent research have been made and applied in transforming performances in any environment. Author David Rock summarizes six steps to transforming performance at work by tapping into the very thing that makes us tick- the brain [Barr 2006]. In the book, the author states that quiet leaders literally improve the thinking of the people they lead which include the way their brains process information, not to mention that the six steps are practical in all organizational levels. The six steps include: 1) Think about thinking, or in other words, improving not the subject of what people are thinking about, but rather the way they think about something; 2) Listen for potential and not simply pay attention to what we are expecting to see, hear or feel; 3) Speak with intent as our ideas are being retained by our audience with an impact that depends on our conversational skills; 4) Dance toward insight meaning forming an environment in which people can make their own insights; 5) Create new thinking which includes exploring the current reality, exploring alternatives, and tapping in on people’s energy; and 6) Follow-up for a long term impact on performance including habits that can improve future accomplishments. All in all, I would have to say that my leadership, though I take into consideration other elements of leadership, is very much inclined to looking at people at a very different light, because at the end, being a leader means a people person, and every task or project should make an impact to people. Bibliography Barr, F. R. (2006). Quiet Leadership: Six Steps to Transforming Performance at Work, A Book Review. Retrieved April 22, 2012, from Break Through Consulting: http://www.breakthroughconsulting.com/book_reports/Quiet_Leadershipfinal.pdf Chapman, A. (2003). Johari Window. Retrieved April 22, 2012, from http://www.usc.edu/hsc/ebnet/Cc/awareness/Johari%20windowexplain.pdf College of the Redwoods. (2010, October 21). Maslow's Heirarchy. Retrieved April 22, 2012, from http://www.redwoods.edu/Departments/Distance/Tutorials/MaslowsHierarchyPDF/Maslows_Hierarchy.pdf Riordan, C. (2010, September 17). Six Elements of Mental Toughness. Retrieved April 2012, 2012, from Forbes.com: http://www.forbes.com/2010/09/17/executive-mental-toughness-leadership-managing-athletes.html Tracy, B. (2008, August 18). The Key to Leadership. Retrieved April 22, 2012, from Brian Tracy's Blog: http://www.briantracy.com/blog/leadership-success/the-key-to-leadership/ Training, Learning and Progress ltd. (2010). Tuckman's forming stroming norming performing model. Retrieved April 22, 2012, from http://www.tlpdelivers.co.uk/Tuckmans%20forming%20storming%20norming%20performing%20model.pdf Watkins, D. (n.d.). Situational Leadership Model. Retrieved April 22, 2012, from Freequality.org: http://www.freequality.org/documents/knowledge/Situational%20Leadership%202.pdf White, M. I. (n.d.). Explicating John Adair’s Action Centred Leadership – Fieldwork Examples from Further Education. Retrieved April 22, 2012, from Center for Excellence in Leadership : http://www.comp.lancs.ac.uk/computing/research/cseg/projects/explicating/Explicating_leadership/Papers/adair.pdf Read More