Please answer the question below with 150-250 words
If identity and personality are positioned as a set of personal, social, or organizational definitions, in what ways might personality and identity present competing perceptions of leader behaviors as followers observe leaders carrying out organizational strategies? Explain.
Please reply to the following question below with 150-250 words
A leader’s behaviors as dictated by personality and identity can cause a rift in the leader-member relationship due to the perceptions that the follower has of the leader. If a leader does not build a strong relationship between the member and the follower, then the actions that are based upon the uniqueness of the leader will not be received well (Zheng et. al., 2020). If the member is unable to identify with the core values of the leader or even with the vision the leader has, then when the leader makes a decision for the organization that is not viewed as appropriate by the member, the member will not stand behind the leader and thus the rift will be created. Should this rift be created, then it is likely that the organization strategy set forth by the leader will be undermined and could cause a major problem. This is not an ideal situation for any leader, however, should the situation arise it is advisable to try and remedy the relationship. Often times the leader must reach out with a technique that will not further ruin the relationship and instead of one that will build up the relationship. Such a strategy can be difficult to find, but not impossible.
Zheng, M. X., Yuan, Y., van Dijke, M., De Cremer, D., & Van Hiel, A. (2020). The interactive effect of a leaders sense of uniqueness and sense of belongingness on followers perceptions of leader authenticity. Journal of Business Ethics, 164(3), 515533. https://doi-org.lopes.idm.oclc.org/10.1007/s10551-018-4070-4
Re: Module 7 DQ 2
2. If identity and personality are a set of personal, social, or organizational definitions, then followers can assume that there is a certain level of independence when their leader carries out in organizations’ goals. Personality and identity may present competing perceptions of a leader’s behaviors. The follower has to have a positive perception of the leader to see when and where the organization is in control versus the leader. These lines are easily blurred if leaders place their own goals over the organization’s objectives (Conger, 1990). The leaders’ joint and separate identities are distinctively related to transformational and offensive behaviors (Johnson et al., 2012). The leader needs to show the followers both their personality and their identity outside of the organization’s leader wants them to portray. The collective has to be healthy and well organized so that a substantial individual’s behaviors do not come off as abrasive or abusive to a weak collective (Johnson et al., 2012). In essence, the leader’s core values must be transparent to the followers, so difficult tasks set out by the organization are not perceived as malicious tasks on the part of the leader. That is, the followers should know what their leader stands for through their personality and identity.
Conger, J. A. (1990). The dark side of leadership. Organizational Dynamics, 19(2), 4455. https://doi.org/10.1016/0090-2616(90)90070-6
Johnson, R. E., Venus, M., Lanaj, K., Mao, C., & Chang, C.-H. (2012). Leader identity as an antecedent of the frequency and consistency of transformational, consideration, and abusive leadership behaviors. Journal of Applied Psychology, 97(6), 12621272. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0029043
Porsha “Teacher Lady” Smith
Re: Module 7 DQ 1
3. My results from the questionnaire seem to show that I am capable of leading change while also fostering development. My two highest archetypes were The Change Catalyst and The Builder. Personally I see some connections with my results and my own internal theatre of experiences (Northouse, 2016). During my adolescent years, change excited me; and still does. Mundanity and rigid consistency tend to scare me, I often play out what-if scenarios in my head and have at least three backup plans ready to employ at any time. Northouse (2016) notes that this constant focus on change can often lead to boredom and cause leaders like myself to think only with concern for the short-term. However, conscientiousness (a focus on success) has been shown to positively impact the success of transformational leadership or change management (Cavazotte et al., 2012). I would say this aligns mostly with my self-examination. Awareness of my personal success and immediate results satisfy my ego and encourage me.
While I enjoy change and innovation, others may not. In order to better serve my following, I need to be cognisant of my followers own psychological abilities to cope with change. If the psychodynamic aspects of follower allegiance are not addressed, productive change is impossible to achieve. Transformational leaders increase follower satisfaction and productivity in the midst of change when they intentionally develop relationships, and also include follower strengths and abilities as a key component to implementing change (Delay & Clark, 2020).
Cavazotte, F., Moreno, V., & Hickmann, M. (2012). Effects of leader intelligence, personality and emotional intelligence on transformational leadership and managerial performance. The Leadership Quarterly, 23(3), 443-455. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2011.10.003
DeLay, L., & Clark, K. R. (2020). The relationship between leadership styles and job satisfaction: A survey of MR technologists perceptions. Radiologic Technology, 92(1), 1222. https://eds-a-ebscohost-com.lopes.idm.oclc.org/eds/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?vid=6&sid=10308799-4c39-44df-bfb7-02fe36545d36%40sessionmgr4006
Northouse, P. G. (2016). Psychodynamic approach. In Leadership: Theory and practice (7th ed., pp. 295-324). Retrieved from https://viewer.gcu.edu/UW4YQK
4. : Module 7 DQ 1
My Leadership Archetype is a combination of Coach and Processor. As I read the descriptions it became apparent there is somewhat of a dichotomy between them. On the one hand, coaches are empathic, great listeners, and motivating, with a positive outlook. Followers find coaches confident and trustworthy. Coaches find it easy to delegate and tend to use a participatory style of management. They struggle with having the inevitable hard conversation with followers because they are so sensitive to others feelings. Coaches may find it difficult to manage crisis situations and can be slow to respond, which can foster underproductivity rather than support progress.
Processors, on the other hand, thrive in crisis situations, and like to create order out of disorder (Kets de Vries & Cheak, 2016). They have skills to manage day to day operations, including good time management, structure, creating/improving systems that support the organizations mission.
The dichotomy between the two styles makes them more like two sides of the same coin rather than oppositional. They compliment each other: processors can adapt and collaborate, making them a good fit with other leadership styles while coaches can also be teamed well with other archetypes. Where processors are not very flexible, coaches are. When processors are less able to empathize with followers, this is one of the strongest characteristics for coaches. Processors tend to lack creativity while coaches have an abundance.
I easily see myself fitting both of these archetypes. The processor part of me can only survive the chaos that is my job by developing and implementing structure. I have a hard time letting go of that with my followers. I tend to want them to follow my case management, time management, and detail oriented style. The coach in me, however, really struggles when I have to do supervision or be tough because I emphasize. I will need to work on being more directive at times. One think I really struggle with is feeling what everyone else is feeling, so in a group supervision or training, I tend to lose confidence in myself because I take on the agitation or other negative vibes I think the team is feeling. This makes it difficult for me to operate as a leader at those times.
Kets de Vries, M. F., & Cheak, A. (2016). Psychodynamic Approach. In P. G. Northouse (Ed.), Leadership: Theory and practice (7th ed., pp. 318-323). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Reply | Quote & Reply