The last two chapters on lasting leadership and creating a culture of sustainability in leadership prompted some reflection on my part. The last chapter in the text resonated with me, especially concerning how many organizations now are doing either the same amount of activities or more activities with less financial and human resources. Hargreaves (2006) stated that "Renewal and restraint are not either-or choices in our challenge to develop resourceful, sustainable leadership" (p.461). The question becomes how do organizations balance renewal and restraint? What are the priorities based on the mission and vision of the organization and how does the leadership of the organization define priorities?
When the economic crisis first occured last year, many organizations were figuring out how to go forward and what to put on hold to make sure their organizations survived. Some organizations scaled back production, permanently cut their staffs, or implemented furlough programs to reduce their operating deficits. At this point, organizations displayed how they embodied concepts of trust, ethics, collaboration, and the other characteristics we discussed in class. It is an interesting process to watch. Some of my questions and thoughts are - how do organizations, higher education and K-12 schools, create a culture of sustainable leadership? What programs or other processes are in place that encourage this? What characteristics influence employee retention? Although this isn't my primary research interest, I know these would definitely be good topics of study.
Tuesday, November 24, 2009
Sunday, November 22, 2009
Teacher Preparation Programs
The two readings we completed for last week on principal preparation and programs was interesting. In chapter 23, one particular area I really enjoyed reading about was the considerations for program design in principal preparation programs. Kelley and Peterson (2002) noted "The development of effective school leaders cannot occur in any single program or time period. Rather it must be part of a long and complex process that builds and accumulates skills and knowledge over time and in different ways." (pp.372-373). The model programs listed afterwards, although still undergoing assessment for effectiveness, reviewed classroom knowledge and field placements in different areas.
As I was thinking about higher education, one of the classes I took at another university, had us complete a project on the future of student affairs as a profession. In the K-12 arena, there are boards for licensure, standards, and tests to complete as entrance into the profession. Although student affairs does have master's programs required for entry into the profession, a master's in student personnel isn't the only degree that will allow one to enter higher education. There are several documents in student affairs that indicate a code of ethics and bodies of knowledge useful for the field, but there isn't one overall exam or criteria for the profession. I am not suggesting their should be one either, but these last two chapters along with a previous course started me thinking about it again. Any other thoughts?
As I was thinking about higher education, one of the classes I took at another university, had us complete a project on the future of student affairs as a profession. In the K-12 arena, there are boards for licensure, standards, and tests to complete as entrance into the profession. Although student affairs does have master's programs required for entry into the profession, a master's in student personnel isn't the only degree that will allow one to enter higher education. There are several documents in student affairs that indicate a code of ethics and bodies of knowledge useful for the field, but there isn't one overall exam or criteria for the profession. I am not suggesting their should be one either, but these last two chapters along with a previous course started me thinking about it again. Any other thoughts?
Thursday, November 5, 2009
Diversity paradigms
In Chapter 19, Thomas and Ely (1996) talk about three different paradigms for managing diversity, the discrimination-and-fairness paradigm, the access-and-legitimacy paradigm and a new approach which the authors have termed the learning-and-effectiveness paradigm.
The discrimination-and-fairness paradigm, the authors note, has been one of the most prominent ways of understanding diversity. When leaders view diversity through this paradigm, they typically look at issues of equal opportunity, fair treatment, recruitment, and complying with equal opportunity laws with the main goal of increasing the demographic diversity in the workforce. One of the key problems with this paradigm occurs when all individuals are viewed the same, which consequently masks the important differences existing in the workplace (Thomas & Ely, 1996).
The paradigm that emerged during the 1980's and 1990's was the access-and-legitimacy paradigm which basically recognized the increasing multicultural diversity in the country and consequently diversified the workforce to reach different segments of the population. One key limitation of this paradigm is that different individuals are hired for the workforce, new market niches are established and maintained, but the results of these efforts are not fully integrated with the rest of the company. For example, the company, Access, asked the question ... "If the French team resigned tomorrow, what would we do?" (Thomas & Ely, 1996, p.277).
The learning-and-effectiveness paradigm, or the emerging paradigm, looks at all employees in the company and opportunities for how diverse perspectives can be integrated throughout the organization. For example, the law firm of Dewey and Levin ended up expanding the issues and cases they looked at from the diverse perspectives in their workforce. The main theme of the emerging paradigm is integrating the diverse perspectives of all employees so the company and others can learn from these diverse viewpoints.
I do look at what Thomas and Ely (1996) are arguing for is the recognition and integration of diverse viewpoints in the workplace, that all views have legitimacy, and need to be integrated in the day-to-day operations and values of the workplace. I did enjoy the article and would be interested to see how this type of leadership not only manifests itself in organizations, but higher education as well.
The discrimination-and-fairness paradigm, the authors note, has been one of the most prominent ways of understanding diversity. When leaders view diversity through this paradigm, they typically look at issues of equal opportunity, fair treatment, recruitment, and complying with equal opportunity laws with the main goal of increasing the demographic diversity in the workforce. One of the key problems with this paradigm occurs when all individuals are viewed the same, which consequently masks the important differences existing in the workplace (Thomas & Ely, 1996).
The paradigm that emerged during the 1980's and 1990's was the access-and-legitimacy paradigm which basically recognized the increasing multicultural diversity in the country and consequently diversified the workforce to reach different segments of the population. One key limitation of this paradigm is that different individuals are hired for the workforce, new market niches are established and maintained, but the results of these efforts are not fully integrated with the rest of the company. For example, the company, Access, asked the question ... "If the French team resigned tomorrow, what would we do?" (Thomas & Ely, 1996, p.277).
The learning-and-effectiveness paradigm, or the emerging paradigm, looks at all employees in the company and opportunities for how diverse perspectives can be integrated throughout the organization. For example, the law firm of Dewey and Levin ended up expanding the issues and cases they looked at from the diverse perspectives in their workforce. The main theme of the emerging paradigm is integrating the diverse perspectives of all employees so the company and others can learn from these diverse viewpoints.
I do look at what Thomas and Ely (1996) are arguing for is the recognition and integration of diverse viewpoints in the workplace, that all views have legitimacy, and need to be integrated in the day-to-day operations and values of the workplace. I did enjoy the article and would be interested to see how this type of leadership not only manifests itself in organizations, but higher education as well.
Monday, November 2, 2009
Educating with strenghts in mind
As I read the past two chapters for this week, I kept thinking about one particular factor in Chapter 20 that plays a role in school performance, but it can also play a role in organizational performance as well. One of the reasons given for understanding disappointing school performance was, "The traditional paradigms for understanding learning differences focus on exposing and fixing deficits, often neglecting the latent or blatene talents within struggling learners" (Levine, 2003, p.291). In public schools and even with organizations, we often focus on the deficit model ... what is the problem with the individual student, employee, or even with the organization rather than trying to decipher and focus on strengths as springboard to school and organizational success. Is it the culture that inhibits the view on strengths or do we always tend to look for what's wrong and try to "fix it" hoping it will be the cure to everything else?
Even in Chapter 19, the African American female who was promoted at the company, Mastiff, and had worked there for 15 years did not think she could use the strengths and leadership abilities she learned in her church community because it would not have been valued at Mastiff. She stated that she knew the style she used could be effective, but also noted, "But I've been at Mastiff for 15 years. I know this organization, and I know if I brought that piece of myself - if I became that authentic-I just wouldn't survive here" (Thomas & Ely, 1996, p.284).
These chapters made me think about organizational culture in terms of the creativity certain cultures allow as well as those that constrain individual talents and different ways of thinking about teaching and learning, criteria for success, and valuing diversity in all forms. I started thinking of questions in terms of are there elements of an organization's culture that constrain change or promote it, what criteria need to be present, what leadership style(s) does one need to exhibit in order to embrace change and diverse perspectives?
Even in Chapter 19, the African American female who was promoted at the company, Mastiff, and had worked there for 15 years did not think she could use the strengths and leadership abilities she learned in her church community because it would not have been valued at Mastiff. She stated that she knew the style she used could be effective, but also noted, "But I've been at Mastiff for 15 years. I know this organization, and I know if I brought that piece of myself - if I became that authentic-I just wouldn't survive here" (Thomas & Ely, 1996, p.284).
These chapters made me think about organizational culture in terms of the creativity certain cultures allow as well as those that constrain individual talents and different ways of thinking about teaching and learning, criteria for success, and valuing diversity in all forms. I started thinking of questions in terms of are there elements of an organization's culture that constrain change or promote it, what criteria need to be present, what leadership style(s) does one need to exhibit in order to embrace change and diverse perspectives?
Tuesday, October 27, 2009
Quote: Transforming culture and institutional homicide
" Schools are cautious and confusing cages where teachers, principals, and students try to create pockets of safety and sanity for themselves, reluctant to leave these safe quarters for parts unknown. Schools are also reluctant to leave these safe quarters for parts unknown. Schools are also storehouses of our memories. To radically transform them is not simply risky; doing so can feel like institutional homicide."
The main item indicated by this statement is that it's difficult to change culture in an organization, whether it is a school or university. Schools and universities alike have histories, traditions, and ways of performing tasks that are ingrained by habit. Also, at times when things start getting too hectic or confusing, individuals like to retreat to a comfortable place of sanity for themselves.
As an example, I was on a training committee for a university I worked at previously. A charge of the committee was to find some new ways of doing training, however certain elements or "sacred items" of the previous training needed to be preserved. This is fine since all organizations need those elements in training programs, but I found it ironic that the changes made went back to the original schedule a year later.
Transforming the culture of an institution is difficult, however if change is needed, leaders at all levels of the institution need to find ways to bring everyone on board in order to get traction and make things happen. Also, changing too much at once can lead to overload and the feeling of needing to retreat to a more secure place. Those are just some of my thoughts on the quote.
The main item indicated by this statement is that it's difficult to change culture in an organization, whether it is a school or university. Schools and universities alike have histories, traditions, and ways of performing tasks that are ingrained by habit. Also, at times when things start getting too hectic or confusing, individuals like to retreat to a comfortable place of sanity for themselves.
As an example, I was on a training committee for a university I worked at previously. A charge of the committee was to find some new ways of doing training, however certain elements or "sacred items" of the previous training needed to be preserved. This is fine since all organizations need those elements in training programs, but I found it ironic that the changes made went back to the original schedule a year later.
Transforming the culture of an institution is difficult, however if change is needed, leaders at all levels of the institution need to find ways to bring everyone on board in order to get traction and make things happen. Also, changing too much at once can lead to overload and the feeling of needing to retreat to a more secure place. Those are just some of my thoughts on the quote.
Monday, October 12, 2009
Goleman's Leadership Styles and Change
Out of the six leadership styles on pages 171-172, there are styles that could definitely help promote change, but other styles which could deter change in organizations. The authoritative styles would be useful in organizations where the commitment is high for employees in the organization, but the overall organization lacks focus and the coherence of a vision. A leader with a strong authoritative style could help move change in the organization by mobilizing others to go with them towards a goal. The affiliative style is helpful when a team atmosphere needs to be created within an organization in order to move the group forward. When a leader creates an atmosphere where people mattered and are valued it creates a strong bond to the group and the goals the group strives to achieve. The democratic style is also beneficial to use in terms of promoting group interaction and coherence towards the goals of the organization. It is also good in terms of developing talent among members of the group. When I served on a board for an honor fraternity, our President used to say, "Good ideas will be smiled upon, bad ideas will be smiled upon, no ideas will be frowned upon." It was her way of encouraging participation and that the best ideas should be open to debate amongst all of us. The coaching style can be used to develop capacity in employees, especially if the employee is learning new roles within the organization and to develop future leadership potential.
The two styles noted in the text as having an adverse affect on climate in the organization were the coercive and pacesetting styles. The coercive style, or "do as I say" style was noted as promoting resistance and resentment, while the pacesetting style made employees more overwhelmed and burned out (Fullan, 2001). There are times, though, when these styles may need to be used. For example, if schools are underperforming severely, there is a lack of discipline, and students are not learning, a coercive style may need to be used in order to bring order back to the school. A pacesetting style may need to be used too, if an organization does not have high goals for itself or is behind in terms of the forward progress of the organization.
Overall, I think that each one of these styles can be used in specific circumstances to promote change of the organization and to develop the capacity and buy-in of the employees of the organization.
The two styles noted in the text as having an adverse affect on climate in the organization were the coercive and pacesetting styles. The coercive style, or "do as I say" style was noted as promoting resistance and resentment, while the pacesetting style made employees more overwhelmed and burned out (Fullan, 2001). There are times, though, when these styles may need to be used. For example, if schools are underperforming severely, there is a lack of discipline, and students are not learning, a coercive style may need to be used in order to bring order back to the school. A pacesetting style may need to be used too, if an organization does not have high goals for itself or is behind in terms of the forward progress of the organization.
Overall, I think that each one of these styles can be used in specific circumstances to promote change of the organization and to develop the capacity and buy-in of the employees of the organization.
Monday, October 5, 2009
The Authentic Leader
Based on our discussion last week, here are my answers to the following questions posed by Robert Evans in terms of authentic leadership:
1. How do I define my role as a leader?
1. How do I define my role as a leader?
Similar to Ed's post, I know that Evans speaks a lot about being a mover or a maintainer. Depending on the situation, I can be a mover in terms of adapting to different situations in order to move things forward. As I leader, I believe it's important not only to think about how changes can impact each level of the organization in the short-term, but the long-term as well. There are times when change is desired and needed and there are also times when change is not planned, but happens as a result of external forces. When faced with an external change of events, leaders need to hold true to the organization's values and their own values in order to progress. There are also times when leaders need to maintain, especially if there has just been a great deal of change in an organization.
2. What inspires the best in staff?
I believe giving staff and employees ownership of the processes and tasks individuals undertake in the organization can inspire the best in staff members. I do believe in the Theory Z view of human motivation in that emphasis needs to be placed on "... human potential, calling for higher levels of trust and for egalitarian work relationships and participatory decision making involving stakeholders at all levels" (Ouchi, 1981, p.10). If employees feel as if they are a part of the process of decision-making and are involved in the day-to-day happenings of the department or organization, they are more likely to exhibit higher levels of motivation and engagement. I also believe developing talent and expertise in every staff member also goes a long way in sustaining morale. Recognition for a job well done and public praise also helps as well.
3. What are my strengths?
This is sad ... I am very aware of my weaknesses, but not so much my strengths as a leader. A few of my strengths are that I am analytical and I like looking at all angles of a situation before making a decision. I also like looking at data to inform decision-making. I am a good listener as well and want to take into account all perspectives. Some of my weaknesses are that I need to develop a greater and more assertive voice in situations and act with conviction and that sometimes I can be stubborn in regard to situations that may reflect the needs or personal desires of one or two members of the group, but not the group as a whole. Overall, I know there are many areas of leadership that I do need to work on in order to grow as a leader.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)