Take Home Final Exam - Research Paper Example

? Take Home Final Exam Number Submitted Take Home Final Exam The Role of Relationships in the Leader’s Network (Marshall – Chapter 13). Relate the limits of closeness in your life experience. Cite positive and negative issues with real life illustrations. The limits of closeness are defined in one’s life through the relationships that were established. According to Marshall (2003), “a relationship is the mutual sharing of life between two or more persons” (p. 163). In explaining the nature of relationships, Marshall (2003) actually begun explaining the concept of mutuality, as a crucial facet in defining explicit contribution of knowledge, skills, or abilities to the interaction. One strongly believes that the aspect of mutuality and the class or category of the relationship would define the extent of closeness or intimacy that is applied. For instance, the classes of relationships, as discussed by Marshall (2003) distinguished between instrumental or cooperative, versus social or consummatory (p. 167). Likewise, the characteristics of relationships clearly included aspects of intimacy or closeness; and scope or extent (Marshall, 2003, p. 167). One is convinced that in social or consummatory relationships, there are more opportunities to establish greater intimacy and closeness. Interpersonal relationships that have been effectively established in one’s life include relationships with family members (parents and siblings), peers (friends and acquaintances), special loved ones (third parties who one developed close or intimate relationships with during one’s life span), and colleagues in the work setting. Within these relationships, one could assert leadership skills and related specifically defined limits of closeness, depending on the role in the relationship that is assumed. For instance, within the family circle, one could assume the role of an eldest sibling and therefore evidentenly assume a legitimate power by virtue of one’s position of birth. As such, one could exemplify leadership role as an authority in delegating tasks or in providing guidance and direction to the next siblings. Likewise, the limits of closeness in this type of social relationship is extended only insofar as familial bonds are established. Thus, as a sibling and a child to one’s parents, it is expected that there is a comfortable level of closeness where private information are assumed to be known and exchanged only within the members of the nuclear family. At the same token, despite sharing similar information regarding family matters or relevant issues concerning each family member, each member also expects a level of privacy and confidentiality that is still maintained. Thus, although a certain level of closeness and intimacy is a given fact within the family circle, there is still a limit to the closeness in terms of matters pertaining each of the member’s personal life. The role of relationships within the work setting is more challenging in terms of establishing and defining limits of closeness or intimacy. This concept was clearly explained by Marshall (2003) when he asserted that “leaders are therefore generally advised not to have personal friends among their congregation, because such friendships cause problems” (p. 173). Leaders or managers at work are expected to delineate their role as a superior to that of being a personal friend, for instance, to one or two of office colleagues. Any preferential attention or affectionate behavior manifested by the leader to a subordinate could be construed as an action of favoritism and is therefore a violation of the policy of avoiding conflicts of interests. Thus, there should be a limit to the closeness that is exhibited within a work environment to abide by the standards of professionalism, as well as conform to ethical, moral and legal standards. It was therefore appreciated from Marshall’s (2003) affirmation that “the question of intimacy in personal relationships can be something of a minefield, because the greater the intimacy, the more highly charged the emotional field is likely to be” (p. 173). This simply means that the more intimate one is with another person, the greater the expectations for mutual contribution or sharing that is expected. If leaders do not want to be misunderstood, they should therefore avoid extending the boundaries of intimacy or closeness in a purely business transaction to be confined in matters which are solely and exclusively confined to the work setting. The advantage of this action is therefore avoiding being misunderstood, preventing any wrong connotations, avoiding conflicts of interests, and preventing violations of ethical and moral standards in the work setting. However, as reminded by Marshall (2003), the disadvantage of restricting closeness of leaders to other people is that they might actually end up feeling isolated, lonely, and being perceived as incompetent in establishing rapport or effective interpersonal relationships with others. Thus, one must be careful in establishing levels of intimacy or closeness in relationships, particularly in the work setting. There are boundaries, rules, policies, and regulations that explicitly define how intimate or close one relationship should be and how levels of restrictness in closeness should be appropriately maintained. 2. The Role of Character in Leadership Character seems to be an encompassing term that describes a person’s combination of traits, qualities, and features which make the individual distinct and unique from others. One is convinced that the role that character plays in leadership is immensely significant. Although it has repeatedly been asserted in various theories that, what initially was thought of was that leaders were born with skills that have been imbibed to make them leaders. As asserted, “leadership skills were once thought a matter of birth. Leaders were born, not made, summoned to their calling through some unfathomable process. This might be called the “Great Man” theory of leadership” (Bennis & Nanus, 2012, p. 15). At that token, it has already been initiated that there are some innate traits, features, or skills that make leader rise above the rest. Character is strongly believed to be one of these features. Character plays an important role in leadership in terms of discerning the set of skills, the type of leadership style, and the amount of power that would influence followers to achieve identified goals. Character assist leaders in exhibiting the contexts and perspectives that make the leadership process applicable in contemporary times through: commitment, complexity, and credibility (Bennis & Nanus, 2012, p. 17). Character assists leaders in exuding power: that which was defined as “the basic energy to initiate and sustain action translating intention into reality, the quality without which leaders cannot lead” (Bennis & Nanus, 2012, p. 23). It is one’s contention that character separates an effective leader to one who simply exists to undertake expected responsibilities. Character delineates a leader who looks beyond what simply needs to be done; to what can still be done to serve the best interests of others. Character is the integration of positive qualities that have been inculcated from assimilating values, beliefs, and standards that conform and abide by ethical, moral, and legal codes of conduct and behavior. For instance, a leader with character would work towards designing strategies which would encourage, motivate, and empower people to fulfill identified goals; but at the same time, ensure that not only organizational goals are achieved, but also aiming to assist in addressing the personal and professional growth of the people he or she gets to lead in the process. There is the ability of leaders with exemplary character to be sensitive to the followers’ needs and discerns certain concerns that could preclude them from merely working to attain delegated tasks and responsibilities. Thus, the leader effectively feels through an inner conscience that some deeper issues need to be resolved before the follower could perform what is expected. Concurrently, character also enables leader to manage themselves and to continuously work on personal and professional growth. A leader with exemplary character knows one’s strengths and weaknesses and works to address the weaknesses. Therefore, it could be analogous to exemplifying positive self-regard, to wit: “positive self-regard seems to exert its force by creating in others a sense of confidence and high expectations” (Bennis & Nanus, 2012, p. 54). Thus, through exuding the positive traits, leaders are able to make followers feel good about what they are able to accomplish. Also, through positive self-regard and exemplary character, leaders assume an optimistic stance in life. They are more resilient and accept the fact that they could learn from challenging experiences and even from failure. As emphasized by Bennis & Nanus (2012), “for successful leadership to occur there has to be a fusion between positive self regard and optimism about a desired outcome” (p. 61). The ability of leaders to see beyond pressing challenges comes part of the set of traits and qualities manifested through a strong character. This aspect of seeing beyond current concerns has been emphasized as possessing a vision: “a target that beckons” (Bennis & Nanus, 2012, p. 70). It was most commendable that Bennis & Nanus (2012) clearly affirmed that leaders with a vision operate “on the emotional and spiritual resources of the organization (or of the subordinates, for that matter), on its values, commitment, and aspiration… Great leaders often inspire their followers to high levels of achievement by showing them how their work contributes to worthwhile ends. It is an emotional appeal to some of the most fundamental of human needs – the need to be important, to make a difference, to feel useful, to be part of a successful and worthwhile enterprise” (p. 71). All of these attest that character plays an important role in leadership for enabling the leader to use emotional and spiritual resources, either of the followers or of the organizations and perform towards the fulfillment of worthy ends. 3. Write a paper on II Timothy 2:1-7 relating the principles Paul is sharing with Timothy to the principles of leadership as found in this course. The principles Paul is sharing with Timothy in II Timothy 2:1-7 focuses on him, as a disciple of Jesus, apparently providing guidance to Timothy, who was initially regarded as a son (Holy Bible: King James Version, n.d., 2 Timothy 2:1). At the onset, Paul’s treatment of Timothy establishes and exemplifies the concept of leadership in terms of asserting a form of authority over a follower. As the leader, Paul therefore manifests that through his past experiences as a transformed person, someone who initially persecuted early Christians or followers of Jesus Christ but was converted into the faith through divine revelation of the resurrected Christ. Therefore, Paul speaks as an enlightened leader, steadfast in faith, and with a vision to spread the word of God to others. The second verse with states that “And the things that thou hast heard of me among many witnesses, the same commit thou to faithful men, who shall be able to teach others also” (Holy Bible: King James Version, n.d., 2 Timothy 2:2) could be interpreted to mean that Paul relays the message that he is entrusting Timothy to echo that which Paul asserts to other people; so that, they in turn, could also be teachers or leaders who could influence others into spreading the word of God. From this verse, Paul exhibited the fact that leaders impart the vision (Marshall, 2003). As emphasized, “it is not enough to get a vision, or even to conceptualize it into clear and well defined goals. If you cannot get people to follow you towards those goals, you are not a leader” (Marshall, 2003, p. 46). Since Paul has evidently been able to convert others through his testimony of conversion, he could be deemed an effective leader through imparting the vision. In the next verse, Paul stated that “Thou therefore endure hardness, as a good soldier of Jesus Christ” (Holy Bible: King James Version, n.d., 2 Timothy 2:3); which could be interpreted as a challenge for Timothy to be prepared in meeting challenges, difficulties, and hardships, as part of the tasks and responsibilities of a leader. From the verse, it was evident that Paul compared a leader to a good soldier of Jesus Christ. And since it was explicitly state that the solder evidently follows the direction and guidance from his paramount leader, Jesus Christ, he must embody the ideals, teachings, traits, character, and all necessary ingredients that the leader exhibits to his followers – and expects them to share with others. Since Jesus Christ was known to have surpassed and endured hardships and extreme suffering, as solder of Jesus Christ, Paul reminds Timothy to be likewise prepared to similarly share in the hard work. One of the hardships and challenges faced by Jesus Christ, during his life as an evangelist and a leader, is the ability to withstand criticism from others. Accordingly, “one of the things leaders often find hard to handle is the criticism and questioning to which they are often exposed” (Marshall, 2003, p. 114). Therefore, Paul expressely provides this reminder to prepare Timothy and be spiritually adept at accepting that hardships are part of a leader’s job and the ability of a leader to withstand and be resilient determines his effectiveness and success. When Paul asserted that “No man that warreth entangleth himself with the affairs of this life; that he may please him who hath chosen him to be a soldier” (Holy Bible: King James Version, n.d., 2 Timothy 2:4), he was emphasizing the aspects of internal assessment of capabilities as a leader to be worthy of being called a soldier of Jesus Christ. Of which Paul added that “And if a man also strive for masteries, yet is he not crowned, except he strive lawfully” (Holy Bible: King James Version, n.d., 2 Timothy 2:5) to stress the leaders quest and pursuit of greater personal and professional growth should not make them content and consider themselves master of their own crafts. The most important facet that Paul reminds Timothy from these verses are the principles of gaining knowledge, skills, abilities through ethical, moral, and legal standards. Finally, in explaining “The husbandman that laboureth must be first partaker of the fruits” (Holy Bible: King James Version, n.d., 2 Timothy 2:5), Paul could have intended to make Timothy realize that as leaders, one’s reward is actually seeing the fruits of one’s labor. To realize that followers’ personal and professional growth and development have been fulfilled, in conjunction with the accomplishent of identified organizational goals is a form of fulfillment to the leaders. Inasmuch as followers and subordinates feel and experience a sense of upliftment for having performed the tasks and responsibilities expected from them, there is also a sense of fulfillment for having realized that contributions towards the goals earmarked by the leader were proven to be worthy. As such, the leader was instrumental in enabling subordinates to realize and feel useful; but more importantly, leaders get the paramount benefit of sharing the joy of having performed the role of a leader to the best of his ability. One would like to conclude the principles of leadership learned from the course by quoting Bennis & Nanus (2012) who averred that “the leader… serves the crucial role of seeing that the right work gets done at the right time, that it flows together harmoniously, and that the overall performance has the proper pacing, coordination, and desired impact on the outside world” (p. 152). A leader’s work is ultimately achieved when the interests of the greatest number of people for the greater good would have been realized. References Bennis, W., & Nanus, B. (2012). Leaders: The Strategies for Taking Charge. Harper Collins. Holy Bible: King James Version. (n.d.). 2 Timothy 2:1-7 (King James Version). Retrieved from biblegateway.com: http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=2+Timothy+2%3A1-7&version=KJV Marshall, T. (2003). Chapter 13: Relationships - The Leader's Network. In T. Marshall, Understanding Leadership (pp. 159-178). Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Publishing Group. Read More