Personal Management Philosophy
by Eli Spangler
Management and leadership are each essential to a successful group operation.
Management has to do with the established way in which tasks are accomplished. Leadership has
to do with how we motivate others to accomplish those tasks. Each of these concepts has several
unique approaches, but leaders and managers generally gravitate toward one or two concepts that
best fit their personality. In this paper, I will identify the approaches that I choose to use in a
supervisory-like environment. I will then discuss my own traits and how they are effective and
also ineffective in this environment. Thought will also be given into steps I can take in the future
to become a more effective leader and manager.
Of the three management philosophies studied in class, the one that makes most sense to
my style is the contingency theory. Contingency theory is all about Plan B, because there’s no
way to guarantee which direction a project will go (Bailey, Theories). In other words, there is no
one set way to manage everything. Eventually, something unexpected will come up and then you
need to have a plan in place to get to your end goal. To get an idea of this theory, imagine that
you are a supervisor to a large department of CTRS’s in a nursing home. This year for the big
holiday party, you wanted everything to be absolutely perfect for your residents. You borrowed
from the classical management theory by creating committees among your staff, assigning each
one a specific job, and having them all report back up the chain to you as problems arose. You
also borrowed from behavioral management theory, organizing a secret Santa event and offering
Christmas bonuses to your staff to boost morale. However, after all that careful planning, you
still have a tiny little feeling that when the day of the party comes, your performers won’t show
up, and the catering van will get stuck in the snow. That tiny feeling is the reason that
contingency theory is important. While the other theories have merit to them, it is quite possible
that a single unfortunate event can render them useless. Many CTRS’s avoid this disaster
situation in programming by always having a “hip-pocket” activity such as trivia available.
I can think of a specific experience in the field that led me to contingency theory.
Emergency responders must learn the Incident Command System for mass-casualty events,
which is arranged exactly like classical management theory suggests, so that everyone has a job
and everyone reports to someone. Unfortunately, in 2013 we got a call for a shooting in
Chesterfield, and we responded with two units, eight men total. Four of us, all under 21, were
new to EMS and this was our first shooting. We were overwhelmed with the chaos and the
number of police, fire, and news vehicles when we arrived. The drivers and medics from both of
our units loaded-up with the patient, who was in bad shape, leaving the four of us on scene
looking very out of place. Panicking and not knowing how to proceed, we ended-up driving the
ambulance back to the station, illegally, with our crew chief giving us instructions the whole way
back. The moral of this story is that even though we spent long hours studying incident
command, when the moment came, everyone abandoned the chain of command and forgot their
role. Our plan B, though it was on-the-spot, saved us from staying on scene too long and making
our agency look bad to other responders. This situation was nobody’s fault, but it probably could
have been avoided if we had created a contingency plan. This management style requires
analysis and some prediction of outcomes, but in the end I believe contingency planning always
pays off.
In terms of leadership styles, I learned from my test results that I am a participatory
leader. According to Kendra Cherry at About.com Psychology (2006), the participatory leader
takes ideas from the group before exercising their position to make the final decision. This leader
is one with the group, not removed or on a different level, and is ready to roll sleeves up and
work with the group. While this may not be as quick or efficient as if the leader told the group
exactly what to do, it is effective because it allows group members the freedom to collaborate
and grow (Bailey, Leadership Styles and Theories). Another reason it is a good leadership style
is because it can result in members feeling more important, and usually this means they will
contribute more creativity and enthusiasm over time. I came to this leadership style over a
number of years. The first leadership position I was ever given was when I was 14 years old, and
I was made the section leader of the baritones in my high school marching band. I got section
leader because I was the best player, even though older students tried for the position. I tried to
run the section like the military, criticizing them when they got notes wrong and shushing them
when they spoke, whispered, and even when they laughed on the field. I lost friends quickly, and
soon there was no more section at all. I learned that even though I may know more details than
someone else, it doesn’t mean that I am better suited to be in charge. That is why I personally
feel more confident in a group, because if my idea is radical or sure to fail, there so many other
ideas to choose from.
In the workplace, I will absolutely be using this leadership style. If I do not, then I am
likely to make a lot of decisions that are best for me and not for everybody else. Imagine if we
need to hold a weekly staff meeting, but I schedule it after the weekly pool program because
that’s when I have lunch; meanwhile all my staff is late because they have to take residents back
to their rooms. I bet they could all agree on a better time that would result in a more productive
meeting, all I would have to do is ask their input. However, I as the leader need to have the final
say, because I was put in that position for a reason, and I may need to steer the group in a
different direction. A group may be tempted to argue back against that decision, but if the leader
has earned their respect by making them feel important, they are likely to let him or her keep that
leadership. Overall, however, I have found that a participatory style truly does increase
motivation and feelings of value from group members.
I think the most important part of leading a group is being open minded. Openmindedness is the one core value that I believe can connect you to all the other values in people.
For example, I may have an employee who is very authoritative, and who assumes leadership
without my permission whenever I leave the room, stating how he thinks things should be done.
Keeping an open mind allows me to identify the strength of his leadership, and to find value in
that piece of him as a person. I may even find a special role for him, or change his job title, so
that he feels more responsible for his team’s success. Open-mindedness will also allow the
supervisor to listen to more ideas from the group which could possibly help to achieve the
common goal. Closed-minded people often shoot-down ideas, and that is no way to build a team.
Another value that I feel strongly about is being polite. I understand that everyone has
their own style, particularly in electronic communication; I’m okay with informal
communications most of the time. On the other hand, I always notice when someone neglects to
say “please” and “thank you”. This is an easy way to make people feel important, yet many
people neglect that opportunity. An employee who feels important is more likely to apply their
skills when they are asked for. It also improves the work environment, and encourages behaviors
such as sharing and perhaps chivalry. At first, having to remember to say“please” and “thank
you” may feel annoying , but soon it will become a passing habit, and you will still give people
that boost by showing them respect.
The last value that would be present in my ideal supervisory environment is that of each
person taking 100% responsibility for their actions. This was a concept introduced to our class
last semester, and I have internalized it a great deal. This means no blaming others, no making
excuses, and no rationalization to save yourself from consequences. Taking responsibility for a
mistake is an excellent way to save time, rather than trying to sort out the details of which people
were at fault at which instant, and who should get in more trouble. I am far less likely to become
frustrated with someone who took responsibility for a mistake up-front than with someone who
waited a day or two to come forth with the truth. A byproduct of this practice is increased trust
within a department, and increased accountability amongst coworkers.
So far I’ve identified my ideal management theory as contingency theory, my ideal
leadership style as participatory, and my top three management values as open-mindedness,
politeness, and 100% responsibility. Now I’d like to focus on my inherent characteristics which
have led me to appreciate those concepts.
One strength that I possess is that of empathy. Putting myself in other peoples’ shoes is
extremely helpful in times of negotiation and conflict. By empathizing with the other person, I
can usually see where they are coming from, based on their background and their personality. I
do not have to agree with them, but if I can make sense of why they are feeling that way, it
allows me to control my emotions and avoid a conflict. In a supervisor position, this actually
helps me approach my employees. I ask myself, “How could I present this task in such a way
that they will be interested and take some leadership?”
Another strength that I have is that I need to have things planned-out. I rarely make lastminute plans, partly because it stresses me out and partly because I am already busy with things
that I planned far in advance. In a group setting, this is helpful because it is hard for deadlines to
sneak-up. It is also helpful because when you ask a group to schedule far in advance with you,
such as a rehearsal for a presentation, the group typically feels more confident before that
meeting even occurs because.
A third strength that I have is that I am analytical. As soon as someone presents an idea, I
am usually already playing-out in my head all the scenarios that might come of it. At times, I will
pick-up on a piece of the puzzle that a less analytical person might have ignored, and together we
can adapt our plan before it becomes a problem. Analytical skills also allow me to consider
consequences of, for example, a disciplinary conversation before it happens. Emotions are
usually involved when it comes to delivering consequences, but in the past I have been able to
find a way to have the conversation and not hurt the person.
That being said, I do have some areas I need to work on as well. The first area, one that
I’m actively working on this week, is that of setting boundaries. My professors helped me realize
that sometimes I am so interested in either making the other person comfortable or avoiding
conflict, that I let others take advantage of me. In a supervisory role, continuing this behavior
would be a great way for me to lose authority and credibility with my employees. My plan to
improve in this area is to start very small, in simple interactions with friends. A friend might ask
me to help them with a problem they are having with a friend while I still have homework that
needs to be done, and I will simply tell them I need to take care of my homework before I take
care of them. As I get more comfortable, I will begin setting boundaries ahead of time, such as
telling my current supervisees at work, “I need each of you to commit to two office hours a
week,” to spread the workload so that it does not all fall on me.
Another weakness I have is that I try very hard not to show frustration. To clarify, I do
not think that angry outbursts or heated discussions are a good way to solve anything. However, I
stifle even the slightest bit of frustration that I experience, and it leads to me stifling other
emotions that come with it. This can negatively affect a one-on-one relationship with an
employee, because I am not being honest and open about my feelings. To change this about
myself, I need to change my opinion about being frustrated. There is nothing negative about
calmly telling someone else, “What you’re saying frustrates me because…” and then having an
honest conversation about it. What I will do (and have started to do) is tell my closer friends
when I am frustrated, and then see how they react. From there I can move on to telling people
I’m not so comfortable with, and see if the reaction changes. I will likely begin to realize that
admitting frustration could actually improve my relationships with people. In a supervisory
setting, setting the expectation of expressing feelings at the workplace in a calm and honest
manner, will increase the self-awareness of my employees, and allow them to focus more on the
real issues that come-up.
A third weakness I have is that, at times, I incorrectly assign my priorities. Being
involved in a number of things means that I divide my time frequently. Sometimes this means
that I have to choose between two commitments, and occasionally I choose poorly. This can look
like me staying late at work to finish a project, and arriving to class tardy. It can also look like
me missing class entirely because I feel that I am needed in another role somewhere else. This
reflects poorly on my judgement, because I came to college to be a student, and therefore being a
student should always be my number one priority. When I become a supervisor later in life, it
will be important for me to set priorities for my employees, and hold them accountable, so that
they keep “the main thing the main thing” (Cottrell, 2002). I must master this important skill
myself before I can expect others to do it. I’ve begun to correct this by setting expectations with
other people. My current supervisors know that my primary role is a student, and that I can’t
miss class for any reason. I also have started an accountability group with two other friends. We
call each other every Friday morning and talk about our goals for the week, and what we got
accomplished last week. They call me out when I say that I missed class or didn’t get a top
priority item done, and they ask me what my plan is to get it done the next week.
Clearly, there are a lot of different pieces which go into puzzles such as management and
leadership. In order to better conceptualize my styles of participatory leadership and contingency
management, and to see their interaction with my core values, strengths, and weaknesses, please
see the visual representation below. Notice that core values are at the base of my management
and leadership. My strengths and weaknesses surround my core values, and my overarching
management and leadership styles are supported by my strengths, weaknesses, and core values.
Theories of
Supervising
Employees
Strengths
Weaknesses
Core Values
• Contingency Management
Theory
• Participatory Leadership
• Empathetic, Planning,
Analytical
• Needs to Set Boundaries,
Show Feelings, and
Prioritize
• Open-Minded
• Polite
• 100% Responsibility
References
Bailey, A. Leadership Styles & Theories [PowerPoint slides]. Retrieved from Canvas website:
https://canvas.longwood.edu/courses/1230447/files/48843381?module_item_id=1109751
8
Bailey, A. Theories [PowerPoint slides]. Retrieved from Canvas website:
https://canvas.longwood.edu/courses/1230447/files/49818869?module_item_id=1140726
6
Cherry, K. A. (2006). Leadership Styles. Retrieved September 20, 2015 from
http://psychology.about.com/od/leadership/a/leadstyles.htm
Cottrell, D (2002). Monday morning leadership: 8 mentoring sessions you can’t afford to miss.
Dallas, TX: Corner Stone leadership Institute.