Personal Development Plan - Essay Example

?PERSONAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN Personal Development Plan Introduction There are different ways by which individuals achieve their potential as leaders or as members of any organization. The matrix illustrates my personal development plan which includes my short and long-term goals; development area/objective; planned development activity; evaluation; and target date. There are various theories which help support the different objectives and chosen plans. This paper shall analyse the different types of organizational culture, identify, and examine the impact of this culture within my area of practice. It shall also discuss the different theories of motivation and leadership, as well as critically evaluate their impact in relation to the management of change. It shall also evaluate team building theories and the implications for effective management of practice. Finally, this paper shall justify my managerial style within the workplace. In effect, this paper shall critically analyse the evidence base for the action plan with the application of current management theories. Discussion As stated in the personal development plan, I need to develop my communication skills. At present, my communication skills are limited and they need improvement; more particularly, my English speaking skills need improvement. Communication is an important part of effective management because it assists in my self-improvement and it aids in successful management (Adair, 2009, p. 4). By increasing reading materials, I can improve my reading and writing skills; and by enrolling in private English classes, I can improve my grammar and syntax, as well as my technical writing skills. These methods can help inject confidence into my speaking, reading, writing, and listening skills (Lehman, 2007, p. 69). Improving communication is a basic need or skill which has to be fulfilled before I can move on to bigger goals. Fulfilling this need is very much in keeping with the theory as set forth by Abraham Maslow and his hierarchy of needs (Outward Bound, 2007, p. 56). There are different theories and motivation and leadership, and these theories affect the management of organizations. According to Maslow’s hierarchy of needs, people start off fulfilling first their physiological needs and then go on to fulfil their safety, social, esteem, and finally self-actualization needs (Owston, n.d). People therefore can be motivated by their basic needs and also by other more noble goals or causes. For some employees, their motivation in working can start off with the basic need to feed their families (Marchionini, 2006, p. 42). At this stage, they would not look beyond the purpose of their work besides feeding themselves and their family. However, once their basic purpose is served, they go beyond that basic goal into higher goals – perhaps, that of saving for their family, and later serving humanity through their work (Marchionini, 2006, p. 42). In my case, my motivation for improving on my communication and eventually my information technology (IT) skills is to maximize use of our organizations’ IT programs. In terms of leadership, the loftier goal for many world leaders has been on the motivation of their armies – with one side insisting that his goal has more moral worth than the others (Owston, n.d). In this case, some leaders may see the need to deliver pain or threats in order to motivate, and others believe that doing so would not be effective ways of motivating people. In other ways, promising more tangible things like money, food, and even excitement can serve better ways of motivating people (Owston, n.d). In managing change, Maslow’s approach to leadership basically welcomes change because a member or even a leader eventually moves up in the hierarchy of needs. Once he fulfils a need, he has to change and move beyond that need on to bigger and better things (Koltko-Rivera, 2006, p. 302). Maslow’s theory therefore, handles and manages change well. McGregor divided human management into the theory X and the theory Y people. His theory X people needed authoritarian management because they hated work and were not capable of taking responsibility (Owston, n.d). The theory Y people, on the other hand, needed management through participation because they were self-motivated with their other wants already being satisfied. These people can be self-directed and can portray self-control when they are committed to a goal (Miller, 2008, p. 40). McGregor’s ‘theory X’ group is less receptive to change. He categorizes people into certain types and he proposes ways of handling them based on their ‘type.’ In applying McGregor’s theory, any change to be implemented would only serve to keep the two types of people in both categories. Although changes would be implemented, both groups would be treated as theory X and theory Y people (Koontz and Weihrich, 2006, p. 288). In my case, I consider myself under the theory Y group because I am receptive to change – towards improving my skills and gaining new information and skills on communicating, on the rehabilitation of stroke patients, and on building my confidence as a leader and as a health professional. Kanter theorized that empowerment is the most important factor in effective motivation and leadership and that management must be ready to promote people from the ranks of the weak and powerless (Armstrong, 2006, p. 124). Kanter wanted to focus on distributing power into autonomous groups which lead to motivation of members and eventually, to better results. Kanter’s theory is also a theory which manages change well because it helps empower those who are weaker – by virtue of their gender, their age, or their financial circumstances (Armstrong, 2006, p. 124). It is a theory which welcomes change in the status quo. Adair, on the other hand set forth the importance of action-centred leadership wherein leaders motivated others through their commitment and their ability to communicate with their people (Reed, 2003, p. 53). In this case, there is a need to build teams and to accomplish and carry out common tasks. He also acknowledges the fact that for certain types of leaders accomplishing varying tasks, certain qualities or leadership styles have to be present in a certain leader (Reed, 2003, p. 53). For example, military leaders have to possess courage; sales leaders have to be good salesmen, and so on and so forth. Adair’s theory is also a strong theory in managing change in any organization because it welcomes unique attributes in people and that these attributes impact differently on the conduct of a group’s or organization’s activities. Based on the matrix section of Blake & Mouton Leadership Questionnaire, I fall under ‘Impoverished or Middle of the Road Management,’ but on Belbin`s Team Roles- A self-perception inventory- I am a ‘Shaper.’ The characteristics of a Shaper are that the person is highly motivated with lots of nervous energy and great need for achievement (Brown and Grundy, 2004, p. 141). It described them as aggressive extroverts who possess a strong drive. They like to challenge others and like to win; therefore they should be prepared to improve their personal development goals (Brown and Grundy, 2004, p. 141). These qualities however need to exist within the organization culture and there are different cultures seen in organizations; the most common of these include: control (hierarchy), collaborate (clan), and create (adhocracy). In the control culture, hierarchical organizations have similarities with bureaucratic corporations and these organizations are identified as stable and well-controlled (Tharp, 2009, p. 3). This organization culture values structure and authority in the decision-making process. In effect, applying this type of culture helps achieve standardization and efficiency in the corporation. The culture of my organization has ‘control culture’ qualities in the sense that there is a hierarchy respected in the organization. By improving my skills within the organization, my place in the organization would be respected and supported. In a collaborative culture as is mostly seen in clans, there is also a semblance of control seen within the organization with the focus of the collaboration being inward and aimed towards integration. The difference is that the ‘collaborate culture’ focuses on flexibility and discretion, not so much on stability and control of organizations (Tharp, 2009, p. 4). The ‘collaborate culture’ has mostly been manifest in some Asian countries where some of their organizations and corporations are family-owned and are therefore, very clannish. There is a team-centred approach to this culture with the organization approaching issues and decisions as a team and as a clan (Jackson and Davis, 2000, p. 24). In the organization I am involved with, there is a need to apply an interdisciplinary approach in the rehabilitation and treatment of the stroke patient. I need to coordinate the services and the skills I have in terms of a larger organization and in terms of a more collaborative health care delivery system. By improving my communication skills, I would be able to coordinate and collaborate with the other members of the team. The ‘create culture’ is very much similar to the ‘collaborate culture’ because they both focus on flexibility and discretion. The difference is that, the ‘create culture’ values flexibility and adaptability (Wymer and Samu, 2003, p. 53). They also perform well in an unmanageable chaos. An example of this type of organization is Google. Google basically creates web tools while using the best possible talents in software engineering to help create new and innovative web services. This adhocracy has managed to make them leaders in web-based technology with their competitors playing catch-up (Tharp, 2009, p. 4). These varying cultures imply that since these organizations have different types of cultures, it is natural to expect that the same beliefs and behaviour would not fit different cultures. For collaborate cultures, they need spaced in order to foster teamwork; high panelled cubes may fit the ‘compete organizations’, but not the ‘collaborate organizations’; and the adhocracy and unmanageable chaos of the ‘create culture’ would not fit the ‘control culture’ organizations. In other words, certain cultures must fit the type of organization; without making such considerations in the management of organizations, inappropriate and ineffective systems and processes would be set forth. In assessing these different types of culture, I have a strong belief that I belong to a culture of control and collaboration. And through my personal development plan, I can help my organization achieve control and collaboration in our organization. The above motivation and leadership theories can be used as team building theories as well (Dionne and Yammarino, 2004, p. 177). In building a strong team, Maslow’s theory sets forth that a member’s basic needs first must be fulfilled. Once the basic and lower level needs are fulfilled, the member can then be motivated to fulfil other needs, and to participate in team activities (Ediger, 2003, p. 48). As was mentioned, I am not yet adept in terms of communication skills. I still need to improve on these before I can aim for loftier and higher goals. In order for me to be an effective part of the team, I have to be able to communicate with the members while also contributing valuable skills and expertise in the rehabilitation of the stroke patient (Phinney and Halstead, 2003, p. 15). Without such contributions, I can actually be discarded as a member of the team. In applying McGregor’s theory X and theory Y, there seems to be a dilemma when these two types of groups are brought together as a team. This is a job therefore for a middle manager. The middle manager’s job is to create an environment wherein all members of the team can work together (Williams, 2002, p. 64). With an environment which is enticing for both team, then trust can be built among members, thereby creating a good team relationship. Based on McGregor’s theory, I can safely say that I belong to his theory Y group. I am motivated to change with little motivation (Olum, 2004, p. 20). I have limitations in my communication, but I am determined to change and improve my communication skills and attributes as a health care professional. The above theories help bring forth support to my personal development plan. I am very much aware that I have limitations as a leader and as a member. However, I am doing something about these deficiencies and limitations. I am taking control of myself and I am collaborating well with my organization in order to allow for effective management. The personal development plan I have conceptualized for myself is very much in keeping with the goals and the culture of the organization. Both my short and long-term goals have been planned in order to accommodate the qualities of my organization and my shortcomings or deficiencies as a member. With these adjustments, I am one step closer towards being a strong member and a future leader in the organization. Works Cited Adair, J. (2009) Effective Communication: The Most Important Management Skill of All, London: PanMacmillan Armstrong, K. (2006) Structural Empowerment, Magnet Hospital Characteristics, and Patient Safety Culture Making the Link, J Nurs. Care Qual, volume 21, number 2, pp. 124-132 Brown, L. & Grundy, T. (2004) Project management for the pharmaceutical industry, London: Gower Publishing Dionne, S. & Yammarino, F. (2004) Transformational Leadership and team performance, Journal of Organizational Change Management, volume 17, number 2, pp. 176-193 Ediger, M. (2003) Language Arts Curriculum, London: Discovery Publishing House Jackson, A. & Davis, G. (2000) Turning Points Transforming Middle Schools: Guide to Collaborative Culture and Shared Leadership, New York: Teachers College Press. Koltko-Rivera, M. (2006) Rediscovering the Later Version of Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs: Self-Transcendence and Opportunities for Theory, Research, and Unification, American Psychological Association, volume 10, number 4, pp. 302–317 Koontz, H. & Weihrich, H. (2006) Essentials Of Management, London: McGraw-Hill Lehman, C. (2007) Business Communication, London: Cengage Learning Marchionini, G. (2006) Exploratory Search: from finding to understanding, Communications of the ACM, volume 49, number 4, pp. 41-46 Miller, K. (2008) Organizational communication: approaches and processes, London: Cengage Learning Olum, Y. (2004) Modern Management Theories and Practices, Makarere University, viewed 22 February 2011 from http://unpan1.un.org/intradoc/groups/public/documents/AAPAM/UNPAN025765.pdf Outward Bound (2007) Leadership the Outward Bound way: becoming a better leader in the workplace, in the wilderness, and in your community, California: The Mountaineers Books Owston, T. (n.d) Motivation and Leadership Theories, Freespace, viewed 22 February 2011 from http://freespace.virgin.net/owston.tj/motiva.htm Phinney, D. & Halstead, J. (2003) Delmar's dental assisting: a comprehensive approach, London: Cengage Learning Reed, P. (2003) Extraordinary Leadership: Creating Strategies for Change, London: Kogan Page Publishers Tharp, B. (2009) Four Organizational Culture Types, Haworth, viewed 22 February 2011 from http://www.haworth.com/en-us/Knowledge/Workplace-Library/Documents/Four-Organizational-Culture-Types_6.pdf Tomlinson, H. (2004) Educational leadership: personal growth for professional development, London: Sage Publications Williams, J. (2002) Professional leadership in schools: effective middle management & subject leadership, London: Routledge Wymer, W. & Samu, S. (2003) Nonprofit and business sector collaboration: social enterprises, cause-related marketing, sponsorships, and other corporate-nonprofit dealings, London: Routledge Read More