Leadership is NOT the same as management.

 In this week's reflection, I think the first thing that came to my mind is "Leadership is NOT the same as management." Yes, I thought it was the same thing as management before. However, I was wrong. A manager can certainly be a leader but not all leaders are managers. We often conflate leadership and management. Most of us use the two terms interchangeably with little downside. When we talk about leaders, we usually mean managers, and when we address managers, we think of them as leaders. It made me think of the definition of a leader. I reckon that leadership is about creating a shared vision of the future and then inspiring others to help achieve that vision. In short, it is the act of influencing others to work toward a goal. It is very confusing sometimes if we compare it to management. Management is defined as the process of dealing with or controlling things or people. It includes the activities of setting the strategy of an organization and coordinating the efforts of its members to accomplish its objectives through the application of available resources, such as financial, natural, technological, and human resources. 

Leadership vs. Management: What’s The Difference?

Therefore, as we can see, one of the differences is that leadership is focusing on "leading people" while management is focusing on controlling things or people, setting strategies, and coordinating efforts. Secondly, good managers don’t have to be great leaders and some leaders may not have the title. However, to smoothly lead a team, generally, you need both. Managers can support team members during daily operations and leaders share the bigger picture so team members can buy into the company’s overall vision. For example, a manager in Greenpeace may set a strategy to achieve or support a global plastics treaty. A leader in Greenpeace may share a vision like "A healthy, peaceful planet where our quality of life is measured in relationships, not things. We can do it together!" According to Dustin Moskovitz, co-founder and CEO, Asana, management is about setting priorities, evaluating priorities, hiring and firing decisions, compensation decisions. On the other hand, a leader is like a coach or a spiritual guide who is responsible for maintaining energy and aligning all members in the same direction. 

One key topic I also want to mention here is that subordinates always pay attention to the level of ethical behaviors the leader demonstrates. Why? Because it is directly connected to trustworthiness. The level of ethical leadership was related to job satisfaction, dedication to the leader, and a willingness to report job-related problems to the leader. Cleverness is a gift, kindness is a choice. A leader can choose to be kind or evil with the same level of cleverness. However, an evil one is leading with fear or the common goals, rather than trust. What's wrong with that? What if your employees do not trust you and become spies or allies of your rivals? It can be more dangerous than announcing a bad product.

Reference

Hickey, K. F., Sri, V., Rosenstein, J., Tormey, T., Thai, J., Desroches, Z., Gittens-Ottley, S., & Schwartz, J. R. & C. (2016, November 29). Dustin Moskovitz shares his lessons on leadership. Wavelength by Asana. Retrieved March 16, 2022, from https://wavelength.asana.com/workstyle-dustin-moskovitz-leadership/ 

You are considering which leadership theories and models will help you succeed even further?

 Introduction

Assume that you have just been promoted to a new position where you have leadership responsibility. You have never had formal leadership responsibilities before, and you wish to maximize the possibility that you will be successful with this new responsibility. Thus, you are considering which leadership theories and models will help you succeed even further. How do you make the final decision? Recall the rational decision-making process, you should identify your subject first. For example, you wish to maximize the possibility that you will be successful with this new responsibility and it also fits with your style. Why it also should be fit with your style? Because it will influence your self-confidence in doing it. For example, with a contingency style of leadership, it would not fit with someone who believes that all subordinates should be treated identically. Now, we have two basic factors, fit with your own personal style and maximize your performance. The next step will be to research and brainstorm possible solutions for your problem. In this case, the possible solutions are the major leadership theories and models that we have learned. Therefore, the major challenge is to develop a pro and con list involving at least three of these theories or models and examine how the theory fits with your own personal style. 

Fits Leadership Theories and Models with My Personal Style

To find a solution, I have to develop a pro and con list involving some of these theories and models. The theories and models I list here are those I am more likely to consider adopting. Transactional leadership such as active management and passive management are not in my consideration because leaving employees to do their jobs without interference, proactively predicting potential problems, and preventing them from occurring, is not my style. That is likely to lead to many unpredictable issues and even big troubles, thus more stress will be pushed on me and my subordinates. Passive management is the same. I cannot leave employees alone and wait until something goes wrong before coming to the rescue because sometimes it will be too late to rescue them. Contingent rewards are probably the ones which relatively acceptable for me. Rewarding employees for their accomplishments is a positive stimulus for better performance. However, it is also can be a dark one when you can provide the same rewards anymore during a crisis such as the COVID-19.

Among The Theories and Models

Therefore, here I will discuss Fiedler’s Contingency Theory, Path-Goal Theory of Leadership, Vroom and Yetton’s Normative Decision Model, Transformational Leadership, and whether they are fit with my personal style. First, I conducted a Least Preferred Coworker scale (LPC) survey and found out I tend to combine my personal liking of a person from my ability to work with that person. However, it is not absolute. I think I can separate business generally, and personal life and work with those people when I am their leader.

Fiedler’s Contingency Theory

According to Fiedler’s theory, different people can be effective in different situations. Placing the right people in the right situation or changing the situation to suit an individual is important to increase a leader’s effectiveness. The theory predicts that in favorable and unfavorable situations, a low LPC leader would be successful. When situational favorableness is medium, a high LPC leader is more likely to succeed. Three conditions are creating situational favorableness: leader-subordinate relations, position power, and task structure. If the leader has a good relationship with subordinates and the task at hand is structured, the situation is favorable. In contrast, low-quality relations with subordinates and the task is relatively unstructured, it is unfavorable. 

Pros

i. Leader-subordinate relations, position power, and task structure are also three crucial parts of evaluating leadership.

ii. The journey of finding low or high LPC leadership is also a trip to better know yourself and understand what styles work better with you.

Cons

i. The relationship is not always at its stable status. Not to mention how to measure and define what is good or what is a bad relationship. 

ii. To predict where are we such as in favorable and unfavorable situations, is a complicated task and time-consuming.

Path-Goal Theory of Leadership

Robert House’s path-goal theory of leadership is based on the expectancy theory of motivation. The expectancy theory of motivation suggests that employees are motivated when they believe their effort will lead to high performance and to be valuably rewarded. So, the leader’s major task is to make sure that happens. In addition, the theory identifies four leadership styles, Directive, Supportive, Participative, and Achievement-oriented. Each of these styles can be effective, depending on the characteristics of employees and characteristics of the work environment. 

Pros

i. The theory makes specific predictions about what type of leader behavior will be effective under which circumstances.

ii. With a supportive style, treating employees well, is a way to build loyalty and also a relatively fair working environment.

iii. With participative style, making sure that employees are involved in the making of important decisions, is similar to providing a stage for excellent actors. It will be more effective when employees have high levels of ability.

iv. Achievement-oriented style challenges employees and focuses their attention on work-related goals. This style is likely to be effective when employees have both high levels of ability and high levels of achievement motivation.

Cons

i. Directive style provides specific directions to the employees by clarifying role expectations, setting schedules, and making sure that employees know what to do. However, the same messages do not get the same results from different people.

ii. House’s path-goal theory underlines the importance of varying one’s style depending on the situation. However, if I misunderstand the situation, I will apply the incorrect style.

Vroom and Yetton’s Normative Decision Model

The Vroom-Yetton model is designed to help leaders to identify the best decision-making approach and leadership style to take, based on each specific situation. Therefore, no single decision-making process fits every scenario. The leader is suggested to make the decision alone using available information, obtains additional information from group members before making the decision alone, shares the problem with group members but makes the final decision alone, shares information about the problem with group members collectively and acts as a facilitator, or just lets the team make the decision. 

Pros

i. Although the model is somewhat complicated, research results support the validity of the model. 

ii. It provides a citation list for adopting a leadership style, rather than looking for a needle in a haystack. 

Cons

i. Vroom and Yetton’s normative model is somewhat complicated.

ii. There are always some chances to be incorrect in each step when trying to find a solution. So, identifying the right scenario you are in is also a tricky task.

Transformational Leadership

Transformational leaders lead employees by aligning employee goals with the leader’s goals. Thus, employees start focusing on the company’s well-being rather than on what is best for them as individual employees. 

Pros 

i. More research has been conducted on this theory than all the contingency theories combined. So, it is a supported model.

ii. Transformational leaders lead employees by aligning employee goals with the leader’s goals. Thus, employees start focusing on the company’s well-being rather than on what is best for them as individual employees. 

iii. Trustworthy. When leaders demonstrate transformational leadership behaviors, followers are more likely to trust the leader. 

Cons

i. It can be hard to always be a charismatic leader, even though it is possible to train people to increase their charisma and increase their transformational leadership.

ii. Charisma is only one element of transformational leadership, and leaders can be effective without charisma.

Conclusion

In doing business or leading and managing a team, I tend to find a win-win strategy for each of the members. Therefore, I tend to align subordinate goals with my goals. It looks like the transformational leadership is relatively suitable for me. Moreover, it is also more research has been conducted and supported theory than all the contingency theories combined. 

References

Fiedler's contingency theory of leadershipif(typeof __ez_fad_position!='undefined'){__ez_fad_position('div-GPT-ad-expertprogrammanagement_com-box-3-0')}; Expert Program Management. (2019, April 30). Retrieved March 14, 2022, from https://expertprogrammanagement.com/2018/11/fiedler-contingency-theory/ 

the Mind Tools Content Team By the Mind Tools Content Team, Team, the M. T. C., wrote, M., & wrote, A. (n.d.). The vroom-yetton decision model: Deciding how to decide. Decision Making From MindTools.com. Retrieved March 14, 2022, from https://www.mindtools.com/pages/article/newTED_91.htm 

Think of A Leader You Admire

 Think of A Leader You Admire

In today's business world, there are so many excellent leaders I truly admire. They led their company to even better performance. However, I will discuss this topic with a popular virtual character from a series of movies, Captain America. People who watched and love his movies will know that he can be a great leader. 

A Brief Story about Captain America

Captain America came from a 2011 American superhero film based on the Marvel Comics character. Produced by Marvel Studios. According to the story, during World War II, Steve Rogers, a frail man, is transformed into the super-soldier Captain America and must stop the Red Skull from using the Tesseract as an energy source for world domination. Before he becomes Captain America, Steve Rogers is small and nearsighted and is deemed unfit for military service in World War II. But his heart leads him to a top-secret experiment that turns him into the hunky super-soldier we all know. In New York City, Steve Rogers is rejected for World War II military recruitment due to his various health and physical problems. Coincidentally, Dr. Abraham Erskine(a scientist who created the original Super Soldier Serum) overhears Rogers' conversation with Barnes about representing his country in the war. Dr. Erskine admired Rogers's personal traits to be a great leader. Then, Rogers was recruited into the Strategic Scientific Reserve as part of a super-soldier experiment. Although the generals were unconvinced by Erskine's claims that Rogers is the right person for the procedure, start to relents after seeing Rogers jump on a grenade to save his comrades. After Rogers emerges from the experiment taller and more muscular, he became a super-soldier.

What Traits Related To A Great Leader Does Steve Rogers Have? 

So, what makes Captain America a great leader? The first one is Bravery, a key characteristic in military leaders. Rogers jumped on a grenade to save his comrades, even though it was so dangerous. Secondly, Rogers, as a great leader, doesn't rely on their titles to command others. He uses his personal power and abilities to lead. Thirdly, Rogers values diversity and is able to balance world-sized egos and powerhouse monsters, finding the value in each of his teammates regardless of their background, powers, or personality. In Captain America: Civil War, Rogers refuses to give up on his childhood friend and eventually is able to bring him onto his own team. Moreover, Rogers has incredible integrity and conviction. He wants to fight the Nazis and refuses to stop trying to join the military. He focused on what he believed is justice and leads not only with words but also with action. Rogers always be the first into the fray and always the last to retreat from the battlefield. In many movies, Captain America acts on several occasions as a role model and puts the needs of the other soldiers above his own. 

So, let's summarize the traits he has that are consistent with what we learned as an effective leader. 

i. He created a shared vision of the future and then inspired other heroes to help achieve that vision. Coincidentally, it matches the definition of leadership, the act of influencing others to work toward a goal. 

ii. He was an informal leader who led people without a formal position of authority but demonstrate leadership by influencing others through personal forms of power.

iii. He does not rely on the use of force to influence people. Instead, other heroes willingly adopt his goal as their own goal. 

iv. He is conscientious, organized, takes initiative, and demonstrates persistence in his endeavors.

v. He has an openness to experience, demonstrates originality, creativity, and is open to trying new things.

vi. Self-Esteem. Leaders with high self-esteem support their subordinates more and, when punishment is administered, they punish more effectively. In Captain America: Civil War, Rogers refuses to give up on his childhood friend and eventually is able to bring him onto his own team. His action shows greater levels of self-confidence and this affects their image in the eyes of his followers. 

vii. He has integrity. He is effective as a great leader who tends to have a moral compass and demonstrate honesty and integrity. 

However, there are some traits related to a great leader he does not have.

i. EQ. Rogers seems to be very emotional sometimes. His ability to control his own emotions and understand other people’s emotions and their internal motivation is somewhat weaker I think.

ii. He is not an extrovert. He is an energetic person, assertive, and demonstrates self-confidence, but is not sociable. He is probably described as a quiet leader, not totally an extrovert one.

Reference

Wise, S. (2018, April 30). Why captain america is the leadership role model you didn't know you needed. Inc.com. Retrieved March 11, 2022, from https://www.inc.com/sean-wise/why-captain-america-is-leadership-role-model-you-didnt-know-you-needed.html 

Escalation of Commitment, Groupthink, Consensus Rule, and Personal Opinion on Nominal Group Technique (NGT)

 During this week's study, I found that if I connect the Escalation of Commitment with a common mistake that poor decision-makers identify their issue incorrectly when trying to use the rational decision-making model, it will be a tragedy. For example, they FEEL they need a car and then jump into step two to consider which one they should buy. However, they probably do not even need a car at all in the first place. Oftentimes, there is a fine line between rational decisions and escalation of commitment. I am an investor myself, most of my investments are in the US stock market. I recognize that some bad decisions I made in the past few years are downplaying negative information or warnings that might cause me to reconsider my investments. The truth is many IPO stocks are usually bad investments in their early five years. However, I overestimated them and did not pull the plug when I should.

Groupthink

Groupthink is also a common cue that leads to a dead end. Many employees feel they are stuck in a decision-making group and heading in the wrong direction but didn’t stand out for themselves. Moreover, they even try to make it reasonable while taking extreme risks. For example, when Russian leaders decided to invade Ukraine in 2022, an unquestioned belief in the group’s inherent morality occurs, which may incline the soldiers to ignore the ethical or moral consequences of their actions. Those decision-makers probably stereotyped views of other countries are seen when their countries discount rivals’ abilities to make effective responses. Many people are also under direct pressure that was exerted who express strong arguments against any of the country’s stereotypes or commitments.

Personal Opinion on Nominal Group Technique (NGT)

As we know that the Nominal Group Technique (NGT) is a technique designed to help with group decision-making by ensuring that all members participate fully. However, I think it takes too much time to process. Moreover, many ideas cannot be explained by just writing them down. Even they could, the ability to clarify these ideas are vary. The solution to the same math question may be explained differently by different teachers. 

Majority Rule

With majority rule, each member of the group is given a single vote and the option receiving the greatest number of votes is selected. However, I reckon that the greatest number of the members does not always make correct decisions and those who did not vote in favor of the decision will be less likely to support it since they are forced to do the things they dislike.

Consensus Rule

Another decision-making rule that I found some bugs in is the Consensus rule. It is built for goals to get fully supported. So, the first bug is time-consuming when it may make sense when support is needed to enact the plan. It is absolutely suitable for big projects but not for daily operation routines. Secondly, it needs many repeated steps until consensus is reached. Therefore, although this decision-making rule is inclusive, participatory, cooperative, democratic, and helps members feel greater satisfaction with decisions, it takes longer with this approach. Moreover, if consensus cannot be reached, then it is sort of time-wasting, and time means money in the business world.

Reference

Roch, S. G. (2007). Why convene rater teams: An investigation of the benefits of anticipated discussion, consensus, and rater motivation. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 104, 14–29.

The nominal group technique (NGT) as a tool for ... (n.d.). Retrieved March 9, 2022, from https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/1609406919866049 

The Rational Model of Decision-making

People love the rewards of being rich but want to skip the process of getting there. When people talk about decision-making, most people only focus on what is the best result? Or, how do we get the best result? However, people usually do not pay much attention to their processes to get there. Appropriate decision-making is the veracious route to attain your goals. So, what is a good decision-maker and what is a poor one? Making good decisions consistently involves choosing options that have the best chances of leading to favorable outcomes. Instead of just relying on your intuition, applying a rational decision-making model can be more effective. 

So, what is the rational model of decision-making? It is a rational model of decision-making that uses logical steps to select the best possible solution. In short, it means that before you decide to do a great thing, you should analyze multiple alternatives and use credible data or facts to choose among options. Rational decision-making is a precise process when you have time to research solutions and discuss the possible outcomes with your partners. It aims to maximize the benefits and minimize the costs of decisions by being objective.

Now, let's talk about each step of the rational decision-making.

Step 1. 

The first step is to identify the problem. This is a tricky one because once you set the wrong topic or you actually don't know what exactly your problem is, you will fail and trap yourself in the darkness that doesn't even exist. For example, suppose that you want to purchase your first house. And, you identify your first step is to where should I live? Or, what kind of house should I purchase? However, the correct topic is to identify whether you actually need to buy a house or not. 

Step 2.

When you actually need to buy a house, the next step is to understand which factors are important to you. How many members will live with you? Where do you want to live? Which location is suitable? How's the climate? Crediable constructors? You probably only have a certain amount of money saved, and you don’t want to take on too much debt, so price range is an important factor as well. 

 

Step 3.

Now, you have listed many factors you care about. The next step is to figure out which factor is much more important for you than others. If each factor is equally important, then there is no need to weigh them. For example, if you truly care about the weather over how big your house should be, the rank of the weather is higher than a big house at the location which is frequently in bad weather. It is similar to writing down a to-do list with a priority order.

Step 4.

In the step 4, which is also the tricky one, requires you to generate ALL alternatives about your options. But, how do you know you have listed all the possible options? Moreover, it is also time-consuming. Therefore, ensure you do have much time for this process. 

Step 5.

Now, you have many options on your hands and you have to evaluate each alternative against the criteria you have established. You are now considering each house's pros and cons.

Step 6.

Okay, it is time to make the choice and pick up the best alternative. 

Step 7.

Then, you implement the decision. You go out and sign the contract to own it.

Step 8.

After you have owned it, you are now evaluating the outcome of your previous decision. Why? Because it will influence the next decision you made. You probably think that it is the final choice you made on purchasing a house. But, who knows? Many people own two or more houses during their lifetime. 

Conclusion

Overall, I think one of the key differences between a rational decision and a regular one is that although there are still many feelings involved in a rational decision, it still takes time to consider more options rather than just impulse buying and purely relying on emotion. Poor decision-makers often make decisions while they are getting emotional. Another common problem that occurs frequently on poor decision-makers is they often identify the topic incorrectly. For example, they FEEL they need a car and then jump into the step two to consider which one they should buy. However, they probably do not even need a car at all in the first place. Good decision-makers must identify their issues correctly. 

Reference

Chi, C. (2018, July 18). Rational decision making: The 7-step process for making logical decisions. HubSpot Blog. Retrieved March 4, 2022, from https://blog.hubspot.com/marketing/rational-decision-making 

Good leadership skills combined with knowledge of group development will help any group perform at its peak level

 During this week's learning journey, I have learned many useful topics about teams, groups, and some leadership skills. Good leadership skills combined with knowledge of group development will help any group perform at its peak level. Instead of just punishing employees when they are lazy, I think there are many ways we can create a win-win strategy to achieve higher goals without sacrificing anyone or anything. As a leader, we are not just hiring a team to help us achieve our goals. We also connect our goals to each member's goals.

Moreover, many issues that can plague groups can also hinder the efficacy of a team. Problems such as social loafing can be avoided by providing clear definitions for roles, expectancy, measurement, and rewards. Suppose that a four-member team is assigned to decode a separating sixteen-figure password, each member is allocated four numbers to decode. The team will get $1,000,000 in cash if they decode it. Each member has to work hard on the task they are allocated to do, to help the team complete the mission. In this case, each task is clearly defined. The expectancy, the measurement, and the rewards are all been put on the plates. Task independence also provides the team with the incentive to work harder since each member knows they must accomplish their own tasks. 

In the case of PointCast, its founder rejected many acquisition offers and walked away from the bargaining table. Such missed opportunities happened frequently in the history of the business world. That reminds me of one successful acquisition, Google bought YouTube for stock that is valued at $1.65 billion. By successfully negotiating the deal, Google has ascertained that it is the Internet’s dominant company and an IT giant. Under the terms of the deal, YouTube will retain much of its identity and will keep its name. This acquisition of YouTube will enable Google to thrive in one area of the Internet where it has failed to gain footing, the online video traffic. Moreover, it was an excellent strategy and opportunity for both of them because the deal will benefit YouTube by having Google’s vast resources to help it navigate some tough issues and developing new software to prevent copyright infringement. 

In addition, another significant knowledge point that I found during this week, is that keeping conflicts centered around ideas rather than individual differences is important in avoiding a conflict escalation. I think many people usually take it personally and then fight each other to prove they are right. However, it is not helpful. Sometimes, we have to resolve a conflict first to solve the actual issue. Moreover, conflicts are not always as bad as we think they are. Why? Because conflicts are often where the new ideas take place or while discussing something new. Just like appropriate stress keeps us growing, healthy conflicts also help a team to perform better.

Reference

Sources: Arnoldy. B. (2008, November 19). Why Yahoo’s Jerry Yang stepped down. Retrieved January 20, 2009, from the Christian Science Monitor Web site: http://www.csmonitor.com/2008/1119/p02s01-usec.html; Auletta, K. (1998, November 19). The last sure thing. New Yorker; Lipin, S. (1996, August 22). In many merger deals, ego and pride play big roles in which way talks go. Wall Street Journal, Eastern edition, p. C1; Wired News Report. (1999, May 11). PointCast fire sale. Wired. Retrieved November 14, 2008, from http://www.wired.com/techbiz/media/news/1999/05/19618.

Sorkin, A. R., & Peters, J. W. (2006, October 9). Google to acquire YouTube for $1.65 billion. The New York Times. Retrieved February 28, 2022, from https://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/09/business/09cnd-deal.html