Leadership (Mgt621): Quiz 3

Front 1

Intro - Authentic Leadership Dimensions (From Luthans, Avolio, Gardner, & Walumbwa)

Back 1

1. Brand New. Very cutting edge. Not much information.
2. To be transformational, do you have to be authentic? Don’t know because there is not much information.
3. Issue: What is the relationship between authentic and transformational? Are authentic transformational (and vice versa) or are they distinct?
4. Have related these characteristics to outcomes – but still limited information

Front 2

Authentic Leadership Dimensions (From Luthans, Avolio, Gardner, & Walumbwa)

Back 2

1. Self-Awareness (S)
2. Relational Transparency (R)
3. Balanced Processing (B)
4. Internalized Moral Perspective (M)

Front 3

Self-Awareness (S): Authentic Leadership Dimensions (From Luthans, Avolio, Gardner, & Walumbwa)

Back 3

1. Demonstrating an understanding of how one derives and makes meaning of the world and how that meaning-making process impacts the way one views himself or herself over time.
2. It also refers to showing an understanding of one’s strengths and weaknesses and the multifaceted nature of the self, which includes gaining insight into the self through exposure to others, and being cognizant of one’s impact on other people.

Front 4

Relational Transparency (R): Authentic Leadership Dimensions (From Luthans, Avolio, Gardner, & Walumbwa)

Back 4

1. Showing the followers the leaders true self – the positives and negatives. An openness.
2. In contrast to transformational leadership, personal image building. This suggests modifying how you come across to other people to enhance the vision.
3. Presenting one’s authentic self (as opposed to fake or distorted self) to others.
4. Such behavior promotes trust through disclosures that involve openly sharing information and expressions of one’s true thoughts and feelings while trying to minimize displays of inappropriate emotions.
5. Most important dimension
6. People can see how you actually feel and since transparent, they can see if he really believes in what he is saying.

Front 5

Balanced Processing (B): Authentic Leadership Dimensions (From Luthans, Avolio, Gardner, & Walumbwa)

Back 5

1. Showing that they objectively analyze all relevant data before coming to a decision
2. Such people also solicit views that challenge their deeply held positions.
3. Will not get caught up in their own biases that run contrary to their beliefs.

Front 6

Internalized Moral Perspective (M): Authentic Leadership Dimensions (From Luthans, Avolio, Gardner, & Walumbwa)

Back 6

1. Refers to an internalized and integrated form of self-regulation
2. The sort of self-regulation is guided by internal moral standards and values versus group, organizational, and societal pressures, and it results in expressed decision making and behavior that is consistent with these internalized values.
3. They are not trying to do what is right or proper but is actually their own internalized values.
4. Most people make decisions with information already in there head.

Front 7

Healthy Narcissistic Leaders (From Lubit)

Back 7

1. High and realistic self-confidence
2. May enjoy power
3. Real concern for welfare of others
4. Does not exploit others
5. Variable attitude toward authority
6. Has values and has consistent follow-through
7. Product of healthy childhood and upbringing

Front 8

Destructive Narcissistic Leaders (From Lubit)

Back 8

1. Grandiose
2. Pursues power at all costs
3. Expresses socially appropriate responses when convenient
4. Exploits others without remorse
5. Submits to authority when necessary
6. Lacks values, sees self as exempt from rules and as deserving to be in charge
7. Product of traumatic childhood and upbringing

Front 9

Abusive Supervision

Back 9

A. This was not in the slides.
B. Looking at the effect of the effects of abusive supervision
C. People who yell and scream and say mean things.
D. The findings are in-line with intuition. People are dissatisfied and not quality work performance but acceptable.
E. Often create employees who seek unions for protection from the abuse.

Front 10

Contrasting Ethical Systems

Back 10

1. Rule-Based Ethics
2. Social Consensus-Based Ethics
3. Ends-Based Ethics
4. Conscience-Based Ethics

Front 11

Rule-Based Ethics: Contrasting Ethical Systems

Back 11

1. Rules of the society determine what is ethical
2. Should be the minimum requirement

Front 12

Social Consensus-Based Ethics: Contrasting Ethical Systems

Back 12

1. Norms and practices accepted by the society determine what actions are ethical
2. This is something communicated through the socialization process.
3. What do you do with prisoners of war?
4. Right or wrong is determined by society

Front 13

Ends-Based Ethics: Contrasting Ethical Systems

Back 13

1. The social acceptability of the goals sought determines what is ethical
2. The end justifies the means

Front 14

Conscience-Based Ethics: Contrasting Ethical Systems

Back 14

1. What one’s conscience allows is ethical
2. Individually based

Front 15

Employee Empowerment

Back 15

1. Job Meaningfulness
2. Job Competence
3. Self-Determination
4. Impact

Front 16

Job Meaningfulness: Employee Empowerment

Back 16

Doing work that is personally meaningful and important to the individual

Front 17

Job Competence: Employee Empowerment

Back 17

High self-efficacy or confidence in one’s skill and ability to do good work.

Front 18

Self-Determination: Employee Empowerment

Back 18

Autonomy, independence and freedom to determine and perform one’s job activities.

Front 19

Impact: Employee Empowerment

Back 19

High impact on and control of what happens one’s work unit.

Front 20

Key Variables in the Vroom-Yetton-Jago (V-Y-J) Model

Back 20

A. BASIC APPROACH: P = Q x A
1. P = Decision performance
2. Q = Technical quality of the decision
3. A = Acceptance of the decision by those who have to implement it

Front 21

AI - For Individual Problems: Vroom-Yetton-Jago Model Decision Making Processes

Back 21

You solve the problem or make the decision yourself, using information available to you at the time.

Front 22

AII - For Individual Problems: Vroom-Yetton-Jago Model Decision Making Processes

Back 22

You obtain any necessary information from the subordinate, then decide on the solution to the problem yourself. In getting the information, you may or may not tell the subordinate what the problem is. The role played by your subordinate in making the decision is clearly one of providing specific information which you request, rather than generating or evaluating alternative solutions.

Front 23

CI - For Individual Problems: Vroom-Yetton-Jago Model Decision Making Processes

Back 23

You share the problem with the relevant subordinate, getting his/her ideas and suggestions. Then you make the decision. This decision may or may not reflect your subordinate’s influence.

Front 24

GI - For Individual Problems: Vroom-Yetton-Jago Model Decision Making Processes

Back 24

You share the problem with one of your subordinates and together you analyze the problem and arrive at a mutually satisfactory solution in an atmosphere of free and open exchange of information and ideas. You both contribute to the resolution of the problem with the relative contribution of each being dependent on knowledge rather than formal authority.

Front 25

DI - For Individual Problems: Vroom-Yetton-Jago Model Decision Making Processes

Back 25

1. Delegate
2. Provide Relevant Information
3. Give Responsibility for Solving Problem.
4. Solution Receives Your Support

You delegate the problem to one of your subordinates, providing him/her with any relevant information that you possess, but giving responsibility for solving the problem by him/herself. Any solution which the person reaches will receive your support.

Front 26

AI - For Group Problems: Vroom-Yetton-Jago Model Decision Making Processes

Back 26

You solve the problem or make the decision yourself, using information available to you at the time.

Front 27

AII - For Group Problems: Vroom-Yetton-Jago Model Decision Making Processes

Back 27

You obtain any necessary information from the subordinate, then decide on the solution to the problem yourself. In getting the information, you may or may not tell the subordinate what the problem is. The role played by your subordinate in making the decision is clearly one of providing specific information which you request, rather than generating or evaluating alternative solutions.

Front 28

CI - For Group Problems: Vroom-Yetton-Jago Model Decision Making Processes

Back 28

You share the problem with the relevant subordinates individually, getting their ideas and suggestions without bringing them together as a group. Then you make the decision. This decision may or may not reflect your subordinates’ influence.

Front 29

CII - For Group Problems: Vroom-Yetton-Jago Model Decision Making Processes

Back 29

You share the problems with your subordinates in a group meeting. In this meeting you obtain their ideas and suggestions. Then you make the decision which may or may not reflect your subordinates’ influence.

Front 30

GII - For Group Problems: Vroom-Yetton-Jago Model Decision Making Processes

Back 30

You share the problem with your subordinates as a group. Together you generate and evaluate alternatives and attempt to reach agreement (consensus) on a solution. Your role is much like that of chairman: coordinating the decision, keeping it focused on the problem, and making sure that the critical issues are discussed. You do not try to influence the group to adopt “your” solution, and are willing to accept and implement any solution which has the support of the entire group.

Front 31

AI (Left Extreme): Trade-Offs Between V-Y-J Styles

Back 31

1. More Control
2. Less Time Required
3. Less Information
4. Less Creative Solutions
5. Less Subordinate Development
6. Less Acceptance By Subordinates

Front 32

DI (Right Extreme): Trade-Offs Between V-Y-J Styles

Back 32

1. Less Control
2. More Time Required
3. More Information
4. More Information
5. More Creative Solutions
6. More Subordinate Development
7. More Acceptance By Subordinates

Front 33

Schriesheim’s “Simplification” of the Vroom-Yetton-Jago Model’s Questions

Front 34

Schriesheim’s Summary of the Key V-Y-J Decision Processes

Back 34

If an individual problem, consider using styles AI, AII, CI, GI, DI
If a group problem, consider using styles AI, AII, CI, CII, GII
Rule 1: Assume you need information from your subordinates unless you know otherwise. Eliminate style AI accordingly.
Rule 2: Keep control if you question either your subordinates’ competence or goals/values. Eliminate styles GI, GII, and DI accordingly.
Rule 3: Assume your subordinates do not trust you to make the decision for them. Eliminate styles AI and AII accordingly.
Rule 4: If you believe that your subordinates will fight over possible problem solutions, eliminate all styles except CII and GII.
Use time or subordinate development to choose from among the styles that remain after considering Rule 4.

Front 35

Key V-Y-J Decision Processes

Front 36

Additional Requirements for Success Using Participation (From Tannenbaum & Massarik)

Back 36

A. Subordinates’ willingness to participate
B. Subordinates’ understanding of enterprise operations
C. Subordinates’ feeling of security
D. Opportunities for meaningful participation
E. Setting of participation boundaries
F. Safeguarding of sensitive information
G. Maintenance of formal authority
H. Sufficient time available
I. Worthwhile economics

Front 37

Styles: Interpersonal Conflict-Handling Styles (From Thomas & Kilmann)

Back 37

1. Forcing (1,0)
2. Collaborating (1,1)
3. Avoiding (0,0)
4. Accommodating (0,1)
5. Compromising (.5,.5)

Front 38

X-Axis: Interpersonal Conflict-Handling Styles (From Thomas & Kilmann)

Back 38

1. Concern for Others
2. From Uncooperative to Cooperative

Front 39

Y-Axis: Interpersonal Conflict-Handling Styles (From Thomas & Kilmann)

Back 39

1. Concern for Self
2. From Unassertive (0) to Assertive (1,0)

Front 40

Essentials of Collaboration (from)

Back 40

A. Confront the conflict.
B. Identify the underlying concerns of the two parties.
C. Pose the conflict as a problem or an intellectual puzzle: is there any way both parties’ concerns can be satisfied?
D. Problem solving/brainstorming to find alternatives which would satisfy both parties
E. Select the best alternative.