A511.8.3.RB_DavisCarl

We’re in the homestretch for this series of blogs!

This week, we looked at Diversity in the workplace and how it can affect performance and overall job satisfaction.

In particular, gender diversity was highlighted in a video we were assigned. Our text had several pages that also discussed the topic of gender in the workplace, as well as the challenges in studying issues around pay inequality and the glass ceiling of business.

To that end, two paragraphs really stood out from our text. Here is the first one.

Regarding the glass ceiling, or the inability of women in business to be selected for the highest levels of corporate jobs, the concepts of gender stereotypes is discussed in our text. (Yukl, 2010, p. 372)

Yukl also writes:

Other possible reasons for the glass ceiling have been suggested (Ragins et al., 1998; Schein, 2001; Tharenou, Latimer, & Conroy, 1994) The explanations include (1) lack of opportunity to gain experience and visibility in types of positions that would facilitate advancement, (2) higher standards of performance for women than men, (3) exclusion of women from informal networks that aid advancement, (4) lack of encouragement and opportunity for developmental activities, (5) lack of opportunity for effective mentoring, (6) lack of strong efforts to gain access to leadership positions, (7) difficulties created by competing family demands, (8) lack of strong action by top management to ensure equal opportunity, (9) bias to select and promote individuals who are similar to the (male) managers who make the decisions, and (10) intentional efforts by some men to retain control of the most powerful positions for themselves. The explanations are not mutually exclusive, and they may combine to create and inhospitable corporate climate for female managers. (2010, p.372) –emphasis added by CSD

Yukl goes on to talk about the issues surrounding leader gender research and the need for more systematic and comprehensive work in that area. He comments further:

It is essential to examine how organizational and cultural factors influence the perceptions and behaviors that shape gender identity. Given the inconsistent findings and limitations of research on gender differences in leadership, the conclusion reached by Powell (1990, p. 74) still seems correct:

“There is little reason to believe that either men or women make superior managers, or that women and men are different types of managers. Instead, there are likely to be excellent, average, and poor managerial performers within each sex. Success in today’s highly competitive market place calls for organizations to make best use of the talent available to them. To do this, they need to identify, develop, encourage, and promote the most effective managers, regardless of sex.”

(2010, p. 375-376)

The video we watched was an interview of Prof. Rosabeth Moss Kanter of Harvard Business school. She is a published Author on the subject of gender in the workplace and had some very interesting comments regarding the status of the workplace she now sees. (Kanter, 2010)

Tying back to some of the issues pointed out by Yukl, at approximately the 5:22 mark of the interview Prof. Kanter comments that she sees the issue of social similarity in play. Social similarity being the premise that when given a choice, humans generally defer to people, ideas, and situations that closely resemble themselves or their own.  I believe this is a tie directly back to item nine in Yukl’s comments above. (Kanter, 2010) (Yukl, 2010)

Prof. Kanter, at approximately the 2:55 mark, also comments about time off from a career to pursue other goals, such as family plans or consulting opportunities, interrupts the standard pay progression of females, perhaps to a greater extent than a male. This ties back to items seven and one in the Yukl text.(Kanter, 2010) (Yukl, 2010)

Near the 7:36 mark, she also talks about our corporate society rewarding knowledge over might and that being reflected in the way top paying corporate jobs are not the positions requiring physical exertion to prove worth, but the jobs that are leader/managerial. This should be a driver to help level the playing field for women, but is still impacted by issues ten and two above.(Kanter, 2010) (Yukl, 2010)

Having spent over six years in management at a Fortune 50™ corporation, I would strongly agree with both Prof. Kanter and Mr. Yukl about the situation of gender diversity in the work place. We have made strides and we still have a long way to go to truly make corporations gender blind. Overcoming this challenge will take a dedicated and concerted effort from the next generation of senior leaders. I believe change of this magnitude most come from both the top down and bottom up to succeed.

The vice-president of the division I work in is female and we have a number of managers, senior and junior, in our organization structure. At the enterprise level, the gender ratio of managers is not reflective of the gender ratio of overall workers at the company. However our company has a Diversity and Employee Rights department that keeps the executive committee focused on these types of issues. It is a good start, but more work is needed. I have attempted to hire the for the jobs I post for by looking for the right person, not the right gender of person. In aviation, finding females to fill posts takes effort as the numbers are skewed toward the male gender, for now. I have seen a number of the ten issues Yukl's notes affect a woman's career. I have, and will continue to work to break down as many of those issues as I can.

As I consider my daughters’ future and observe the trials and tribulations my wife has faced in the workplace, I know that I must work to eliminate gender issues wherever I am working or living. I agree with Yukl and Powell that choices must come down to who is the best performer. Not who is the best male or female performer. (2010)

As a side note, I just witnessed a situation that echoes Yukl’s comments about some jobs being stereo-typically filled by males or females. (Yukl, 2010) At the hotel I am staying at on vacation, I have observed 100% of the counter and wait staff to be females and 100% of the valet parking attendants to be male. I find that very interesting. Don’t you? Maybe there’s a study to be made here….

  

Kanter, R. M. (2010, April 2, 2010) Women, Ambition and (Still) the Pay Gap/Interviewer: S. Green. Harvard Business School Idea Talk, Harvard Business Publishing, YouTube.com.

Yukl, G. (2012). Leadership in Organizations (S. Yagan Ed.): Pearson Education, Inc.

A511.7.3.RB_DavisCarl

A511.7.3.RB_DavisCarl

We’re at week seven and going strong! Thanks for stopping in to see what’s on tap.

The focus of our reading this week was ethical, servant, spiritual, and authentic relationship along with strategic leadership in organizations.

We’ll focus on the aspect of authentic leadership and how it’s applied. Authentic leadership is based on positive psychology and psychological theories of self-regulation. The theory attempts to integrate earlier theories about effective leadership with concerns for ethical leadership. The definition of authentic leadership varies for different theorists, but they all emphasize the importance of consistency in a leader’s words, action, and values. Additional aspects of authentic leadership include positive leader values, leader self-awareness, and a trusting relationship with followers. (Yukl, 2012, p.351)

My take-away from learning about this concept is that it essentially describes a leader who is real. Real in the sense that they are truthful, trustworthy, ethical, and stable day after day. The people that work with them can count on a known quantity being there when they get to work. The reactions of the leader are predictable and of appropriate quantity, be it to good or bad news. The leader does what they say they will while looking out for the good of the employees and the company. The leader has the best interests of her or his employees at the forefront of their decisions.

Working with a leader that exudes authenticity provides the workers with a sturdy base from which to perform and grow. They have confidence that they have a reliable advocate that is looking out for them as they do their job. That knowledge is empowering, in and of itself.

In my six years as a senior manager for a corporation, I have been developing and refining my leadership skills and style.  Taking a moment or two to do some self-evaluating, I believe I incorporate authentic leadership actively in my style. There are aspects that allow me to somewhat stand out from my peers.

 I strongly value the dedication and effort of those that work for me. I make an effort to ensure they know that I recognize and appreciate their efforts. When possible, I make note of their contributions in the presence of their peers. I have also made an effort to learn which people like to be recognized publicly and which do not. I tailor the recognition accordingly. I value people who recognize my preferences, as well.

Another part of my leadership style revolves around information sharing. I highly value people that have been willing to share and pass along information. I keep my team informed. I want them to have a picture of the situation we are in, what we face, and where we are going. They need the information to make decisions as they go through the day.

Stability is another facet of my style. This has been one of the tougher skills to hone, but I value having a supervisor that doesn’t “fly off the handle”. Whether the news is good or bad, and especially if the news is bad, I demonstrate that I recognize the issue without reacting in a way that may shut-down or otherwise turn-off the message bearer. The absolute last this I want is for those who are trying to keep men informed to feel they cannot.

In an article by Goffee and Jones (2006) we read about some leaders that maintained or demonstrated their authenticity via various means. They embraced their uniqueness and leveraged it as a part of their leadership style. Whether it was the way Bill Gates maintained his geekiness, the unique way John Harvey-Jones dressed, or the way nurse Carol Browne maintained her charm and poise in uniting multiple levels of hospital staff in their care for her patients, their authenticity garnered a reaction from those with whom they came in contact. (Goffee and Jones, 2006, p.32-33)

I, too, have attempted to preserve my uniqueness at work. The attire I choose, usually a two-piece suit, has become so familiar that on days I do not wear a tie people comment. I have maintained my sense of humor and my love of learning. I share what I learn and the people that work for me know and appreciate that I do.

Alas, I am still human. I occasionally have moments of doubt, selfishness, frustration, elation, and a myriad of other feelings that all of us are capable of having. I recognize that the people that work for me are human, too. I have even had the occasion to shed a tear in front of my team in a moment of deep pride of what we had accomplished. Their reaction left no doubt that they appreciated being there for that very real moment.

My leadership style will always be a work in progress because the situation I face is different every day. I owe my family, the people that work for me, and my company the effort to be the best leader I can for them. Being authentic is a cornerstone of that leadership.

I look forward to seeing you next week!

Yukl, G. (2012). Leadership in Organizations (S. Yagan Ed.): Pearson Education, Inc.

 Goffee, R. a. J., Gareth. (2006). Getting personal on the topic of leadership. Human Resource Management International Digest, 14(4), 3. doi: 10.1108/09670730610666382

A511.6.3.DQ_DavisCarl

Welcome to week six of the current volume at the Educated Leadership blog!

This week we are looking at the idea of having, or crafting, meaning at work. There is an article in the Harvard Business Review that provides a concise look at the topic called “Getting Beyond Engagement to Creating Meaning at Work.”(Ulrich, 2010)

They discuss the finding that people who succeed at creating meaning tend to work harder, more creatively, and with more tenacity. (Ulrich, 2010) The companies that employ these people benefit, the customers that interact with the employees benefit, and the shareholders, in turn, benefit.

The question then, is how important is it for leaders to help employees to craft meaning at work? As we have seen in our lessons during this class, one of the leader’s most important jobs is to create and communicate a vision for his or her team.

 If done correctly, each member of the team will find something in the vision they can build meaning into their work.

The simplicity of that one sentence belies the difficulty in making the connection across a work group. Remember that each person will interpret the communicated vision through their cultural and experiential lenses. Communicating the vision to reach all team members will take careful consideration and probably, multiple versions of the same story.

Why is getting the vision communicated so important, because that information will provide the building blocks for each person to craft meaning into their part of the work. As we noted above, when they craft that meaning they, and the organization, thrive.

Additionally, empowering the members of the team is a very important part of being a transformational leader. “Psychological empowerment involves a combination of meaningful work, high self-efficacy, self-determination, and an ability to influence relevant events.” (Yukl, 2012) If the meaning of what they are doing has not been made evident to them, their attitudes and performance will suffer.

When we are presented with the opportunity to lead a change at work, providing the tools to realize meaning is mandatory. Reviewing the reasons for accepting or rejecting change (Yukl, 2012), providing a clear meaning for the change will impact the opinions and beliefs of the affected parties. Whether or not the employees decide the proposed change is necessary, feasible, cost effective, would cause personal loss, or is inconsistent with the company or personal values can be directly influenced by the meaning the employees derive from the vision of the leader. The last point in Yukl’s list refers to the leaders not being trusted. (Yukl) If the leader can help impart meaning to the change, trust should be at least maintained, if not bolstered. Supporting the idea of acceptance of change, “An additional requirement is an acceptance of the need to change and a positive willingness to engage in processes that may be difficult and challenging. Change agents can build this in two ways: first, by empowering participants, and second, by encouraging them to broaden their perspective with regard to the nature of change and its purpose and benefits.” (Chapman, 2002) That perspective is a powerful building block of meaning.

Since the dawn of man, people have searched for meaning in what they do. Leaders should act as catalysts for their workers in forming the meaning they desire at work. Great leaders will understand that and be especially aware that times of change require a dedicated focus on giving the workers opportunities to derive meaning form the situation they face.

Chapman, J. A. (2002). A framework for transformational change in organizations. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 23(1/2), 10. doi: 10.1108/01437730210414535

Ulrich, D. a. W. (2010). Getting Beyond Engagement to Creating Meaning at Work. Harvard Business Review, 4. https://hbr.org/2010/06/getting-beyond-engagement-to-c

Yukl, G. (2012). Leadership in Organizations (S. Yagan Ed.): Pearson Education, Inc.

A511.5.3.RB_DavisCarl

It’s nice to have you back at the educated leadership blog! This week we’re going to look at a style of leadership called “remote transformational leadership.” Can transformational leadership be felt across distances?

Our reading was a research article called “Remote transformational leadership.” (E. Kelvin Kelloway, 2002) The researchers noticed that most previous studies of transformational leadership had focused on face-to-face interactions. With the advent of globalization, extended spans of control, and advanced communication technology, leaders are frequently tasked with leading employees that work in remote locations, or with leading so many employees that direct face-to-face contact on a regular basis is difficult (E. Kelvin Kelloway)

The researchers hypothesized that this imposed distance was requiring leaders to communicate more via electronic means, such as e-mail. There were studies that determined the geographical distance had a negative impact on the leadership’s ability to impact performance. (E. Kelvin Kelloway, 2002)

The researchers wished to determine if leadership styles could be transmitted and received via e-mail. They also wanted to see if receiving a positive message, as opposed to a negative one, was perceived to be associated with positive outcomes.  The first study was done via reading vignettes to groups of students. As a second study, they wanted to see if they could get even better results via a lab based study of the same questions and actually using e-mails. (E. Kelvin Kelloway, 2002)

The overall questions drive back to whether people can be lead via e-mails and what the impact of those types of communication could be.

The researchers recruited college students to listen to readings of e-mails that attempted to demonstrate either, transformational leadership style, management by exception style, or laissez-faire style. They were asked what style they heard.

The result of the first study was related in this way, “The results of this study show that individuals can indeed differentiate between different leadership styles within e-mails. Second, consistent with our expectations, e-mails containing transformational leadership messages were associated with greater interpersonal justice and satisfaction compared to messages based on the management-by-exception or laissez-faire styles.”(E. Kelvin Kelloway, 2002)

In study two, instead of having the messages read to groups or individuals, the subjects were actually given e-mails to read.  The researchers hypothesized that “individuals exposed to e-mail messages containing a charismatic or intellectually stimulating message would express higher levels of task motivation, and demonstrate higher levels of performance on a laboratory task than individuals who received e-mail instructions that did not contain these aspects of transformational leadership.” (E. Kelvin Kelloway, 2002)

Again, the subjects were found to be able to identify the leadership style being represented in the e-mail. They also documented that the subjects that received the transformational leadership style communication performed better on a problem solving task than those in a control group!

These results will be of value to a majority of those in management positions, not just those with employees more than a stone’s throw away. The main reason is that this study reflects upon basic communication. Even managers who see their employees daily end up communicating via e-mail at some point. This study indicates that the message sent carries more impact than just the words on the screen may convey. The reader picks up on the voice of the writer, so care must be taken when authoring the memo or letter.

My current job gives me the opportunity to practice this skill every day. Whether I am writing a note to a peer that is 20 meters away or to one of my employees 6000 miles away, I have to be cognizant of the mood or tone of the correspondence. Even with painstaking efforts being made, it is still difficult to ensure how your message will come across to the reader. My experience is that it is important to spell out what you are trying to get across. If any room for interpretation is left, rarely will the reader come to the conclusion you hope they will. Also, sarcasm doesn't work in an e-mail.

This research is also important because it demonstrates the power of this type of communication. The term “e-mail” is commonplace and as banal at the word “television”. However, this study reminds us there is gravitas in each message we send, especially in our roles as leaders.

E. Kelvin Kelloway, J. B., Elizabeth Kelly, Julie Comtols, Bernadette Gatien. (2002). Remote transformational leadership. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 24(3), 163-171. doi: 10.1108/01437730310469589

Welcome back to another week at the Educated Leadership blog!

This week we looked at the ways leadership was originally examined. Specifically, we explored what were known as traits and some concepts known as contingency theories.

Originally, it was thought that a person could be tested for traits and skills that would pre-dispose them to be a good leader. Studies were conducted to identify those traits in the hope of finding keys to identifying future leaders earlier. On the personality side, traits like self-confidence, emotional maturity, extroversion, and energy level were identified and sorted. Values, like fairness, justice, and honesty were also cataloged. Skill at a particular job and competency level were also studied and weighed. Last, but not least, self-identity or the feeling of identity one gleans form a job was taken into account.

Studies were conducted that followed managers along their career and attempted to tie the traits to success or failure. Some looked only at the jobs managers held at a given time. Some involved whether or not the career of the manager progressed or stalled out at some point.

The general finding was that, “Some traits and skills increase the likelihood that a leader will be effective, but they do not guarantee effectiveness.” (Yukl, 2012)

Contingency theories came about when trait theory couldn't narrow down the skills needed to a specific set. The various theories attempt to illustrate how aspects of a leadership situation can alter the performance of a leader. (Yukl) The theories are mainly composed of three variables. There can be more. There’s one predictor (e.g. task behavior), one dependent (e.g. subordinate satisfaction) , and one or more situational variables (e.g. task structure, workers’ values, expertise, and leader authority). (Yukl, pg. 163)

There were issues regarding the weighting of variables, which variables to apply, and deciding which impacts were measured and in what manner. In general, the evidence supporting contingency theories of effective leadership is inconsistent and difficult to interpret. (Yukl, pg. 175)

The inability to find a universal theory of leadership via traits or contingency theories has led to continuing studies exploration of the finer points of leadership. The degree I and my classmates are pursuing furthers those attempts to understand leadership and management.

Reflecting upon my own traits and skills, I see areas of competency and areas where I am less adept.

I believe I demonstrate a high energy level and tolerate stress relatively well. However, my team can pick up upon my stress level and will mention when they pick do. I know that stress manifests in sleeplessness and snacking for me. There are tell-tale signs to see in just a few days’ time.

I am self-confident. My team and colleagues have commented on my “command ability” that seems to grab a room when I walk in. The jobs I have held and sports in which I have participated demanded self-confidence and that helped to develop that trait over time. Conversely, I regularly ask myself if I am being overly self-confident. Having worked with people who exhibited the tendency to be over-confident, I do not wish to present that image to the people who work with and for me.

I am a believer in having a considerable amount of control over destiny, when it comes to an internal locus of control. My last supervisor actually gave a colleague and me the direction to “create our own destiny.” That worked just fine for me.

Building on the ideas of self-confidence and an internal locus of control, I can tell you that I am a strong believer in another particular trait. That is the trait of competence. Being competent at a job inherently builds confidence, both in the person taking the action and in those observing the actor. Achieving and maintaining competence in a skill requires dedication and practice. When discussing something as broad as leadership, the challenge is colossal.

Demonstrating a lack of competence, aka incompetence, will quickly damage one’s ability to lead any person or group. Incompetence can be perceived or actual. Either one is deadly to a leader’s career.

I know there is no perfect leader. I know I have opportunities to improve on the way I do things on a daily basis. I do the best I can and strive to improve. I have been able to leverage my skills and traits in the jobs I have held.

I know that the ideas of contingency theories apply in my daily life as I adapt my leadership depending on the situation I face. The world is a dynamic place. Human interaction and business operations are very dynamic. Leadership and leaders must adjust rapidly and adroitly to be successful.

Traits and contingency theories are good ways to examine leadership and management. Take time to understand them as you build your skill as a leader. You will be rewarded with more tools to use in your leadership skillset.

Yukl, Gary A. (2012-02-09). Leadership in Organizations (8th Edition) Pearson HE, Inc.. Kindle Edition.

A511.3.3.RB – Power and Influence

Ah! Power and Influence: The gravitational force of leadership. A person who lacks possession of these essences cannot be a leader.

Our reading this week walked us through types of power and influence along with how one could acquire, or lose, these necessary gifts.

“Power involves the capacity of one party (the “agent”) to influence another party (the “target”), but this influence has been described and measured in several different ways. The term may refer to the agent’s influence over a single target person, or over multiple target persons. Sometimes the term refers to potential influence over things or events as well as attitudes and behavior. Sometimes the agent is a group or organization rather than an individual. Sometimes power is defined in relative rather than absolute terms, in which case it means the extent to which the agent has more influence over the target than the target has over the agent.”(Yukl, 2012)

The depth and breadth of the power and influence is impacted by many variables. Interestingly, the perception of power may be the most important aspect of the lesson this week. If the target perceives that the agent possesses power, influence is possible. A raw form would be the use of a bluff in the game of poker. Conversely, if the target lacks the perception that the agent possesses power, it does not exist. Think of the “Do you know who I am?” rants that sometimes occur at airline ticket counters or hotel check-in desks.

“An agent will have more power over some people than over others and more influence for some types of issues than for others. Furthermore, power is a dynamic variable that changes as conditions change. How power is used and the outcomes of influence attempts can increase or reduce an agent’s subsequent power.”(Yukl, pg. 186)

We all have learned to operate in the influence of power. As babies we were beholden to those that provided for our needs. (In a role reversal, our cries provided us with the power to command our parents. “Feed me! Change me! Hold me!”) We learned who could get us what we needed and, as we grew, what rules they had for us to follow. We learned basic skills in the wielding of power and influence from reacting to our parents and teachers.

We learned that roles can provide legitimacy of power. The teacher can make your life miserable and the Principal will back her or him up. There are rules that define the power.

We recognized reward power. We learned who could provide us with treats or free time.  We found out about coercive power, too. We learned who could ground us and what would get us grounded. There might even be some corporal punishment to drive the point home.

As we progressed through school, opportunities to experience expert power could be found in our teachers and professionals with whom we interacted. They had the knowledge we needed. When we couldn’t get the information easily, or just wouldn’t provide it, we learned the power that merely holding information could provide.

Finding out that there are jobs that are more comfortable to do, or more coveted for their pay or prestige taught us that there is power to be found there, as well.

Power and influence are dynamic. As Yukl states, “it changes over time due to changing conditions and the actions of individuals and coalitions.” (Yukl, pg. 193)

My current job requires that I both project and respect power in many ways.

The title and position I have been given by my company sets a certain level of power in the organization. There are policies, processes, and rules that delineate a part of the power I wield. Employees are all educated in the hierarchy of the corporation and have expectations about what I can and cannot ask of them.

Professional expertise and experience provide another source of power for me. I possess government issued licenses and maintain demonstrated technical proficiency at a very high level.  At the same time, the job I hold is considered by many to be prestigious. That provides cachet in some circumstances.

The level of responsibility I am presented with demands that I wield a level of power commensurate to protect the assets and people for whom I am deemed accountable. The expectation of others that I have their safety at heart is the most demanding form of power in my possession. It is the one I am most cautious about using…or not using.

In my organization’s day to day operations there is the power I have to provide opportunities for growth for my direct reports, to provide information freely, to ensure their needs are being met so they can do their jobs economically, and to ensure they feel integral to the operation.

How, when, and to what extent I use the power I have earned (from my peers, reports, and superiors) or donned (from my position) is as variable as the weather. Rarely are days the same. The only thing I know for sure is the there will be lessons learned and I hope to be able to apply what I learn correctly when the chance next arises.

Meanwhile, I am under the influence of all of those forces of power because I work in the middle layers of a very large corporation and perform work, at times, that carries a factor of risk that is comparatively higher than many jobs. As a middle manager, the energy flows up, down, and laterally.

Have I had an opportunity to experience dysfunctional Leader-member-exchange (LMX) relationships? Yes. “The basic premise of the theory is that leaders develop an exchange relationship with each subordinate as the two parties mutually define the subordinate’s role.” (Yukl, pg. 222) As the perfect leader and the perfect subordinate are yet to meet, I know I have been on both sides of this equation in a dysfunctional role.

“When leaders are perceived as exhibiting negative behaviors to subordinates, subordinates reciprocate by engaging in negative behavior.” (Rozhan Othman, 2009) Does one behavior always elicit the other? Not necessarily, and Othman et al discuss the situations in detail, if you get the chance to read their article.

Much like flying an airplane on a flight path can be broken down into multiple corrections “back onto the planned path as a myriad of forces keeps trying to knock you off”, being a leader requires the same type dedicated resilience to being good. The forces trying to distract you and knock you off will always be there. Plan well and keep tracking back to where you need to be. I feel like that is what I am doing all the time.

Yukl, Gary A. (2012-02-09). Leadership in Organizations (8th Edition). Pearson HE, Inc.. Kindle Edition.

Rozhan Othman, F. F. E., Ng Lay Shi. (2009). Understanding dysfuncntional leader-mamber exchange: antecedents and outcomes. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 31(4), 24.

A511.2.3.RB_DavisCarl

Here we are in week two!

Our discussion topic concerns supportive behavior by leaders and managers. First, let’s look at what leadership behaviors may fall under the banner of being supportive. In our text, Mr. Yukl provides some guidelines for demonstrating supportive behavior. (2012, pg.64)

• Show acceptance and positive regard.

• Provide sympathy and support when the person is anxious or upset.

• Bolster the person’s self-esteem and confidence.

• Be willing to help with personal problems.

As I read the guidelines and the descriptions provided in the book, the word that kept popping into my head was ‘inclusion’. One of the main draws of being on a team or in a group, at least from my perspective, is the feeling of being included. A leader needs to communicate to the members that they are part of the whole.

The act of being inclusive requires more than sending out a paycheck each week. Demonstrating care and concern for the individual builds deeper ties. To that end, the care and concern being demonstrated by the leader must actually exist. If compliments or support appears the least bit insincere, damage is done to the relationship.

I appreciated the following passage in the book. “Stress is reduced by showing appreciation, listening to problems and complaints, providing assistance when necessary, expressing confidence in the person, doing things to make the work environment more enjoyable, and buffering the person from unnecessary demands by outsiders. Stress is increased by making unreasonable demands, pressuring the person to work faster, being overly critical, and insisting on compliance with unnecessary bureaucratic requirements. Although results in research on the effects of considerate, supportive leadership are not consistent, it is likely this type of behavior will improve subordinate satisfaction and performance in many situations.” (Yukl, pg. 64)  If proper communication is made up front, the need for added stress from the leader should be lessened or removed. If a leader finds they must constantly harangue, coerce, or threaten the group, there are issues of support, communication, and development that need to be addressed before moving on to the next project.

Are there times when stress needs to be applied in the workplace? Yes. Deadlines and performance goals serve those functions admirably. Does every team need occasional motivation to maintain a high level of performance? Yes. Being supportive is one of the methods for motivating a person or team.

A dilemma present in corporate work environments is the perception of being too supportive, especially if the attention seems to fall upon an individual or small group. The Human Resource (HR) shop in many a company has their days filled with allegations of preferential treatment. The rules that managers and leaders must work within make the job of supporting very defined. In extreme cases, legal action has occurred. Harassment, favoritism, or merely the perception thereof, must be avoided.

The first three bullets above can, and should, be handled by the manager. In the case of the willingness to help with personal problems, the company will hopefully have programs and systems in place to help provide that help.  In the event the company does not provide assistance, the manager/leader can provide assistance by identifying professional help for the employee and providing time for the employee to seek that help.

Providing opportunities for subordinates to develop their skills is an integral part of supportive leadership. The guidelines from our book provide an excellent resource from which to begin. (Yukl, pg. 66)

• Show concern for each person's development.

• Help the person identify ways to improve performance.

• Be patient and helpful when providing coaching.

• Provide helpful career advice.

• Help the person prepare for a job change.

• Encourage attendance at relevant training activities.

• Provide opportunities to learn from experience.

• Encourage coaching by peers when appropriate.

• Promote the person’s reputation.

As I have gained experience as a manager, my desire to provide the assistance the guidelines denote has only grown stronger. I am a firm believer that providing opportunities for personal and professional growth to an employee is beneficial to more than just the employee. The company benefits from the person gaining more skills and confidence, the manager benefits by having more skills on their team to bring to bear on issues, and the employee gains skills, knowledge, and confidence.  I believe that if the employee wins, the company will win in the long run. The leader’s role is to locate the opportunities and, maybe more importantly, identify the proper timing of the opportunity. The employee’s desire to grow, the right opportunity, and the right time all need to be present or the result will be less than optimal.

I have been the receptor of growth opportunities. When I was younger, I didn’t appreciate them as much as I do now. I have even gone back and thanked managers from jobs I held long ago after pondering the opportunities they presented me. I learned that I didn’t necessarily see the benefit at the time. The important this is that my manager did see it.

The third part of supportive leadership that Yukl discusses is providing praise and recognition. “Recognizing involves giving praise and showing appreciation to others for effective performance, significant achievements, and important contributions to the organization.” (Yukl, pg. 68)

Let’s take a look at the guidelines provided by Mr. Yukl. (Pg.69)

• Recognize a variety of contributions and achievements.

• Actively search for contributions to recognize.

• Recognize improvements in performance.

• Recognize commendable efforts that failed.

• Do not limit recognition to high-visibility jobs.

• Do not limit recognition to a few best performers.

• Provide specific recognition.

• Provide timely recognition.

• Use an appropriate form of recognition.

Across the companies I have worked for through my career, I would say this recognition has been handled the poorest of all the facets of leadership. Most places have some sort of reward and recognition tools for managers to use. The breakdown comes at the delivery.

Three lessons I have learned that I would gladly pass along are to be sincere, not everyone wants to be recognized in front of a crowd, and to know that an honest ‘thank you’ is one of the best tools you've got.

Taking the time to recognize the efforts of someone means investigating the hours of work, noting the stress they felt, the obstacles they overcame, and the impact of the job they did on the company and the group. Handing them a hat and a handshake is not enough.

In summary, the guidelines of supportive leadership serve to remind us that we lead people. People with lives, needs, and desires that need to be addressed by the leader. I tend to tie the needs back to Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs, Maslow (1943) because I find the structure easy to remember. Start with the physiological needs of the employee, then the need for safety, love or belonging, esteem, and finally self-actualization. The guidelines above tie in to the basic needs of the employee quite well. The supportive leadership techniques are just another tool to bring to bear as we face the daily challenges at work, home, and in life.

Yukl, Gary A. (2012-02-09). Leadership in Organizations (8th Edition). Pearson HE, Inc.. Kindle Edition.

Maslow, A. H. (1943). A Theory of Human Motivation. Psychological Review, 50(4), 26.