Written Assignment 2
by
Ewing Coleman Green
EDD 9100L CRN 35777
Leadership
Nova Southeastern University
March 2, 2013
Table of Contents
Page
Introduction ………………………………….……………..….…………………………..……...1
Leadership Explanation …………………………………..……………………………...…….....2
Leadership Style …………………………………………………...……….................….........….3
Legacy …………………………..…………………………………………...………...….........…8
Strengths and Development Needs ……………………………..…………...………...….........…9
Justification …………………………………………………...……………………….…...........10
Summary ………………………………………………………………………………………...11
References ……………………………………………………………………………………….13
Appendices
A Questionnaires ………………………………………………………………..…..…15
B Other Questionnaire Results …………………………………………………...…....27
ii
1
Written Assignment 2
When we look at organizations from past and the present as well as apply conjecture into the
future, obstacles will emerge, whether in (a) our career paths; (b) the way subordinates,
colleagues and superiors view us; (c) our leadership style; and (d) the preparation needed to
best accelerate our professional opportunities especially in a global and highly diverse world.
Organizations are represented by people from a vast array of backgrounds and life experiences
(i.e., personal, professional). Since we must work in a ”diverse” world, introspection regarding
our own leadership, communication, and thinking styles is key to understanding our successes
and failures as leaders. As an aspiring leader, it is critical that you understand leadership issues
through many lenses. For this assignment, you are asked to create a Leadership Portfolio
addressing the topic “What is Leadership and Who You Are as a Leader.” In the Blackboard
link for Written Assignment Two you will find a series of questionnaires that will help you
explore different aspect of your leadership style. Select a minimum of 5 of these instruments or
you may select any other instruments you find appropriate. Complete each instrument and
include it in your portfolio. In addition, you will need to include a minimum of 10 scholarly
resources to support your positions. Successful responses to this assignment should be relevant
to your future as a leader, both personally and professionally. Through this assignment, you
should learn more about yourself as well as be able to assess key characteristics of
organizations. In your research, you should look at other future thinking organizations that are
continually changing and redefining the way they conduct business and deal with the culture.
This paper is organized in seven sections. They include an introduction, explanation of
personal leadership, personal leadership style, legacy, strengths and development needs,
justification, and summary.
Introduction
Crafted before researching the definitions by leaders in the field, I defined leadership as
the attainment of desired organizational outcomes through the influencing of others. The themes
of results and influence that I suggested repeatedly appear in the literature.
Northouse (2012) stated that, “leadership is a process whereby an individual influences a
group of individuals to achieve a common goal” (p. 6). Rost (1991) argued that, “leadership is a
process of collaboration that occurs between leaders and followers” (as cited in Northouse, 2012,
p. 5). Kouzes and Posner (2007) stated that, “leadership is not about position or title, “not about
organizational power or authority,” “not about celebrity or wealth,” “not about the family you
2
were born into,” “not about being a CEO, president, general, or prime minister,” and “definitely
not about being a hero;” rather, “leadership is about relationships, about credibility, and about
what you do” (p. 338). Clawson (2012) stated, “in the end, leadership is about results, about
outcomes” (p. 16). Finally, in a lengthier definition, Bhatti, Maitlo, Shaikh, Hashmi and Shaikh
(2012) stated:
Leadership is a social influence process in which the leader seeks the voluntary
participation of subordinates in an effort to reach organization goals, a process whereby
one person exerts social influence over other members of the group, a process of
influencing the activities of an individual or a group of individuals in an effort towards
goal achievement in given situations, and a relational concept involving both the
influencing agent and the person being influenced. (p. 192)
The balance of this paper provides evidence for the argument that I am a democratic and
participative leader with strong visioning and conceptual skills, driven by a preferred emphasis
on process and task.
Leadership Explanation
If others were to ask me to explain myself as a leader I would say that I hold most dear
my responsibility to serve student development with integrity in achieving desired organizational
outcomes. To do so requires clarity of the organization’s mission, a sustained focus on the
required process, and the effective engagement of people to achieve the objectives. In my current
school, we have a new mission and the middle school division is organized along grade-level
professional learning communities (PLC), on one of which I serve as leader. Therefore, as a
grade eight PLC leader, my first responsibility is the positive development of the 78 students in
the PLC, and to do so, the effective engagement of the six teachers who comprise my team.
Having worked in corporate operations for 19 years and in education for 14 years, as well
as having raised two fine young men from a 30+ year marriage, I have the benefit of many work
and life experiences to draw upon. My undergraduate education in mechanical engineering,
3
master’s degree in curriculum and instruction, and doctorate work to date have also strongly
influenced the formation of my leadership abilities and style.
I find that I am most effective when I am supported by leaders whose doors are open
when I need to resource them and whom provide the latitude to perform my role without
micromanagement. I enjoy having organizational goals to work toward and setting personal
annual professional growth goals. When alignment exists between organizational and personal
growth goals, I feel strongly empowered as both leader and performer.
Leadership Style
I administered all 10 of the Northouse (2012) leadership questionnaires. Appendix A
contains the questionnaires in order of review below. The following discussion provides
substantiation that my dominant leadership style is democratic and participative, and that I lead
through strong visioning and conceptual skills, driven by a strong emphasis on process and task.
Table 1 shows that my primary leadership style is primarily democratic (high rating)
followed by low-moderate ratings for both authoritarian and laissez-faire styles.
Table 1
Results from Leadership Style Questionnaire (Northouse, 2012, pp. 63-64)
Style
Democratic
Authoritarian
Laissez-Faire
Leadership Style
Score
24
16
16
Range
High
Low moderate
Low moderate
Northouse (2012) reported that democratic leaders “work with subordinates” without
putting themselves above them, “they see themselves as guides rather than directors,” “help each
subordinate reach personal goals,” and “make sure everyone is heard” (p. 56). Similar to
Northouse, Bhatti et al. (2012) argued:
4
Although a democratic leader will make the final decision, he/she invites other members
of the team to contribute the decision making process. This not only increases job
satisfaction by involving employees or team members in what’s going on, but it also help
to develop people’s skills. (p. 193)
Likewise, Odogwu, Adeyemo, Jimoh, and Yewonde (2011) found that in a school setting
“principals of secondary schools should be encouraged to be more democratic and flexible so as
to foster an atmosphere of good working relationships with their teachers” (p. 284). Research by
Taleb (2010) would suggest that my leadership style may be somewhat unusual for a male. He
reported that “female leaders are inclined to adopt a democratic and interpersonally-oriented
style as opposed to the autocratic and task-oriented styles of leadership that are usually adopted
by male leaders” (pp. 296-297). Overall, I find that these characteristics of democratic leadership
reflect my values and behaviors as a leader.
Table 2 reveals that my path-goal leadership style is participative (high rating), followed
in descending order by achievement-oriented, supportive, and, directive styles.
Table 2
Results from Path-Goal Styles Questionnaire (Northouse, 2012, pp. 224-225)
Leadership Style
Participative
Achievement-oriented
Supportive
Directive
Path-Goal Styles
Score
14
12
11
10
Range
High
Moderate
Moderate
Moderate
Northouse (2012) reported that a participative leader “invites others to share in the ways
and means of getting things done,” “they work to establish a climate that is open to new and
diverse opinions” of others, and “integrates their suggestions into the decisions regarding how
the group or organization will proceed” (p. 218). Again, these characteristics of participative
leadership resonate with my values and behaviors.
5
Painter (2011) reported that many organizations are undergoing a shift in leadership style
“from directive to participative management styles, or from hierarchical to team-based structure
and decision-making. Structural shifts move from more centralized efforts of the committee
to decentralized efforts, reaching out to the membership at large” (p. 111). For example, Paris,
Howell, Dorfman, and Hanges (2009) studied male and female leaders in 27 countries and
reported, “In general, female managers prefer participative, team oriented, and charismatic
leadership prototype dimensions more than males. Contrary to popular belief, both males and
females valued humane-oriented leadership equally” (p. 1396). Likewise, Randeree and Chaudry
(2012) reported that, “people-centered or participative leadership style is a determinant of job
satisfaction” (p. 72).
Table 3 shows that my rating was ‘very high’ for visioning skill. Northouse (2012)
reported that visionary leaders are “able to paint a picture of the future that is attractive and
inspiring,” ensuring that “people are working productively to achieve a common goal” (p. 111).
Table 3
Results from Leadership Vision Questionnaire (Northouse, 2012, pp. 123-124)
Visioning skill
Leadership Vision
Score
46
Range
Very high
Table 4 shows that I have ‘very high’ conceptual leadership skills and also strong
administrative and interpersonal skills.
Table 4
Results from Leadership Skills Questionnaire (Northouse, 2012, pp. 103-104)
Skill
Conceptual
Administrative
Leadership Skills
Score
27
23
Range
Very high
High
6
Interpersonal
22
High
Similarly, Tables 5 and 6 reveal strong process and task orientation.
Table 5
Results from Conceptualizing Leadership Questionnaire (Northouse, 2012, pp. 11-12)
Conceptualizing Leadership
Emphasis
Score
19
18
17
16
16
16
Process
Skill
Behavior
Ability
Trait
Relationship
Table 6
Results from Task and Relationship Questionnaire (Northouse, 2012, pp. 79-80)
Orientation
Task
Relationship
Task and Relationship Orientation
Score
22
19
Range
High
High moderate
Questionnaire 2.1 in Northouse (2012) involved gathering anonymous feedback from
colleagues on leadership traits. I chose to have the five faculty members of my PLC team
complete the questionnaire and deliver it to my in-box located in the middle school office,
ensuring anonymity. Table 7 contains the results.
Table 7
Results from Leadership Traits Questionnaire (Northouse, 2012, pp. 39-40)
Trait
Articulate
Perceptive
Selfconfident
Self-assured
Persistent
Leadership Traits
Rater 3
Rater 4
4
5
4
5
Rater 1
5
5
Rater 2
4
4
5
5
5
5
5
4
4
4
5
Rater 5
5
4
Average
4.6
4.4
Self
4
3
5
5
5.0
4
5
5
4
5
4.4
4.8
4
5
7
Determined
Trustworthy
Dependable
Friendly
Outgoing
Conscientious
Diligent
Sensitive
Empathetic
-Overall-
5
5
5
5
4
5
5
4
4
4.8
5
5
5
5
4
5
5
5
4
4.6
5
4
5
4
4
4
5
4
4
4.4
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5.0
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
4
4
4.7
5.0
4.8
5.0
4.8
4.4
4.8
5.0
4.4
4.2
4.7
5
4
5
4
4
5
5
3
3
4.1
The results are generally positive with an overall average rating of 4.7/5.0. There is a
high degree of consistency of respondent ratings across all 14 traits, meaning that members of
my professional learning community agree with how they view my traits as a leader. Comparing
the 14 trait averages to my self-rating there is strong agreement, with matching traits receiving
the lowest ratings, and generally I gave myself lower ratings than others (overall self rating of
4.1 versus average rating of 4.7). Further analysis and interpretation is included in the Strengths
and Development Needs section below.
It is appropriate, at this point in the paper, to consider the complexity of leadership and
that leaders do not exhibit a uni-dimensional, continuous style. Were leaders to adhere to one
extreme, such as purely task-oriented leadership, negative consequences can occur, such as
diminished employee development (Sahertian & Soetjipto, 2011). Hunt (2010) studied 54
Australian business senior executives and found evidence of the democratic-autocratic
continuum proposed by Tannenbaum and Schmidt (1973). He reported that:
Leadership styles among Australian senior executives reflect a range of autocratic and
democratic practices, but that these executives are three times more likely to reflect
democratic practices than autocratic ones. The results of this study further indicate that
these executives have a definitive tendency to exhibit patterns of leadership action that
are underpinned by a strong achievement-orientation. (p. 212)
Matlwa (2009) similarly stated that leaders do not exhibit one style. Rather, he argued, “that
which one applies is situational. Leadership depends on the circumstances, the nature of the
8
organization and the individual” (p. 19). These findings also support the widely-held proposition
that leadership is a process where effectiveness is measured primarily be the results achieved. In
addition, studies have shown the benefits accrued by both task- and relationship-oriented
behavior, such as Taberno, Chambel, Curral, and Arana (2009) who reported in their findings
that, “Task-oriented leaders effected higher group efficacy and positivism among members of the
group while relationship-oriented leaders effected greater cohesion between the groups
members” (p. 1391). Similarly, Yukl, O’Donnell, and Taber (2008) explored how the leadermember exchange theory is related to specific types of leadership behaviors. They found that,
“relations-oriented behaviors can also be combined with relevant task-oriented behaviors that
improve role clarity, coordination, and efficient use of resources” (p. 297). Both task and
relationship orientations clearly have roles to play in leadership.
Tables 8, 9, and 10 are included in Appendix B and report on Setting the Tone factors,
Responding to Members of the Out-Group, and Conflict Style dimensions of my leadership. The
results show that I have balanced setting team tone factors, an ‘average’ rating on responding to
out-group members, and I have ‘average’ to ‘strong’ ratings on the five conflict styles.
Legacy
I seek to be known as having been an outstanding educator who kept students’ best
developmental interest first, for having collaboratively led an extraordinary professional learning
community, and for passionately modeling lifelong learning and the relentless pursuit of
intentional goals. As a person who prefers to let my actions speak louder than my words, I leave
it to others to determine the extent to which I am making progress toward this legacy. I focus on
what I can control, and that is the process of continually learning and improving as a professional
9
educator and human being. The most meaningful feedback I receive is from students who tell me
or leave me a note telling me that I have made a meaningful impact on their development.
Strengths and Development Needs
The above tables 1 through 7 provide the most relevant data in considering my strengths
and developmental needs as a leader. The data from Tables 1 through 3 suggest that I primarily
exhibit democratic leadership with a high degree of participation from others, that I have strong
visionary skills, and that I strongly value an achievement orientation. As stated above, this focus
on results appears to be important for effective modern leadership (Hunt, 2010; Tannenbaum &
Schmit,1973; Matlwa, 2009). In addition, the data from Tables 4 through 6 suggest that I have
strong conceptual leadership skills, a strong focus on process and task, and the unanimous 5.0
ratings in Table 7 on self-confidence, determination, dependability, and diligence suggest that
these are among my strongest leadership traits.
Relative to areas for improvement, the data provides direction. Tables 4, 5, and 6 reveal
that interpersonal skill, relationship emphasis, and relationship orientation, respectively, scored
the lowest. Although each of these three rated as moderately high to high, relatively speaking
they represent an opportunity for improvement. This perspective is reinforced by the data in
Table 6 where the lowest rated trait was empathetic (4.2/5.0) and four tied at 4.4/5.0 (perceptive,
self-assured, outgoing, and sensitive). Again, in an absolute sense these three ratings are strong,
but the data across Tables 4 through 6 paint a picture of a leader who could be better at relating.
Bahreinian, Ahi, and Soltani (2012) studied personality dimensions and leadership style
and identified a correlation between personality types and the task-relationship leadership
continuum. They suggested that, “task-oriented behavior is concentrated more on organizational
goals than group members’ needs,” and “task-oriented leaders are those who are extremely
10
anxious to focus on group goals, and on tools to achieve them,” while “relationship-oriented
managers, on the other hand, are those who care about the relationships of group members and
create a friendly and supportive atmosphere in the working environment” (p. 101). While I did
not take a personality test as part of this assignment I suspect I would fall somewhat on the
introvert versus extrovert continuum, since, as Bahreinian, Ahi, and Soltani (2012) stated,
“extroverts enjoy interacting with others and get motivated and become energetic when
socializing; hence, they tend to go toward relationship-oriented leadership style” (p. 107).
The compositions of leader personality and task-relationship behavior have important
implications on the workplace. In a study on leadership and communication, de Vries, BakkerPieper, & Oostenveld (2010) reported that:
Charismatic and human-oriented leadership correlated even stronger with perceived
leader’s performance, satisfaction with the leader, and subordinate’s commitment than
leader’s supportiveness and had similar-sized correlations with the two knowledge
sharing behavior variables; all of these correlations were stronger than the correlations
involving task-oriented leadership. (p. 373)
Therefore, from an improvement perspective, I need to identify and act on strategies that will
result in my becoming a better relater. This should have a positive impact on my leadership
effectiveness and on my PLC.
Justification
Clawson (2012) provided an excellent model to consider as justification for how I might
go about maintaining my strengths and continue to improve. He described three levels of
leadership where Level One is visible behavior, Level Two is conscious thought, and Level
Three is based on values, assumptions, beliefs, and expectations (VABEs). He suggested that the
three levels are physiologically analogous to the body, head, and heart, respectively.
11
In the context of the literature and leadership portfolio provided in this paper, perhaps it
is useful to consider that Level One is consistent with autocratic and task-oriented leadership,
while Level Three is consistent with democratic and relationship-oriented behavior. Moving
from Level One to Level Three requires shifting influence from authoritative and top-down to
participative and individual choice. This shift requires greater interpersonal skill and I suggest
represents where I need to focus.
Specifically, Clawson (2012) suggested some Level Three influence techniques which
include “visioning, purpose definition, honesty, openness, emotional story telling, anecdotes, and
tender emotions” (p. 32). These techniques are consistent with the leadership traits in Table 7
that revealed areas of further opportunity for me (empathetic, perceptive, self-assured, outgoing,
and sensitive). This is where I shall start in interactions with my PLC.
Summary
As a result of developing this leadership portfolio and reviewing some of the literature, I
learned more about leadership and about myself as a leader. Based on the questionnaires
employed and reported herein, my style relies heavily on democratic and participative
interaction, with strong visioning and conceptual skills, and driven by a preferred emphasis on
process and task. While my interpersonal skills were strongly rated there is room for
improvement in relationships. Further development of relations skills will likely have a positive
impact my leadership ability and my PLC.
There is excellent alignment between organizational and personal mission at this point in
my life, perhaps best exemplified by the match between Shanghai American School’s (SAS,
2013) first (lifelong passion for learning) and third (courage to live their dreams) strategic
objectives and my doctorate work wherein my applied dissertation (AD) focus is student self-
12
efficacy. The required extensive literature review has greatly informed not only the AD process,
but also my personal sense of self-efficacy as a leader. The resultant synergy is proving to be
tremendously motivating as a person and as an educational leader. Going forward, by keeping
Clawson’s three levels of leadership in mind and acting further from the heart should bear fruit in
my role as a leader.
13
References
Bahreinian, M., Ahi, M., & Soltani, F. (2012). The relationship between personality type and
leadership style of managers: A case study. Mustang Journal of Business and Ethics, 3,
94-111. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com.ezproxylocal.library.nova.edu/doc
view/1260994535?accountid=6579
Bhatti, N., Maitlo, G. M., Shaikh, N., Hashmi, M. A., & Shaikh, F. M. (2012). The impact of
autocratic and democratic leadership style on job satisfaction. International Business
Research, 5(2), 192-201. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com.ezproxylocal.library.
nova.edu/docview/963357720?accountid=6579
Clawson, J. G. (2012). Level three leadership: Getting below the surface (5th ed.). Upper Saddle
River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
de Vries, R. E., Bakker-Pieper, A., & Oostenveld, W. (2010). Leadership = communication? The
relations of leaders' communication styles with leadership styles, knowledge sharing and
leadership outcomes. Journal of Business and Psychology, 25(3), 367-380. http://dx.doi.
org/10.1007/s10869-009-9140-2
Hunt, J. B. (2010). Leadership style orientations of senior executives in Australia: Senior
executive leadership profiles: An analysis of 54 Australian top managers. Journal of
American Academy of Business, Cambridge, 16(1), 207-217. Retrieved from http://
http://search.proquest.com.ezproxylocal.library.nova.edu/docview/324732182?account
id=6579
Kouzes, J., & Posner, B. (2007). The leadership challenge (4th ed.). San Francisco, CA: JosseyBass.
Matlwa, M. (2009). Building a management style. Accountancy SA, May, 18-19. Retrieved from
http://search.proquest.com.ezproxylocal.library.nova.edu/docview/215224504?account
id=6579
Northouse, P. G. (2012). Introduction to leadership (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
Odogwu, H., Adeyemo, S. A., Jimoh, J. A., & Yewonde, R. O. (2011). Science, mathematics and
technology teachers' perception of school environment. Multicultural Education &
Technology Journal, 5(4), 274-287. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/17504971111185108
Painter, D. R. (2011). Organizational change: A work in progress. Nephrology Nursing Journal,
38(2), 111-111, 124. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com.ezproxylocal.library.
nova.edu/docview/857240971?accountid=6579
Paris, L. D., Howell, J. P., Dorfman, P. W., & Hanges, P. J. (2009). Preferred leadership
prototypes of male and female leaders in 27 countries. Journal of International Business
Studies, 40(8), 1396-1405. http://dx.doi.org/10.1057/jibs.2008.114
14
Randeree, K., & Chaudhry, A. G. (2012). Leadership - style, satisfaction and commitment.
Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 19(1), 61-85. http://dx.doi.
org/10.1108/09699981211192571
Rost, J. C. (1991). Leadership for the twenty-first century. Westport, CO: Praeger.
Sahertian, P., & Soetjipto, B. E. (2011). Improving employee's organizational commitment, selfefficacy, and organizational citizenship behavior through the implementation of taskoriented and relationship-oriented leadership behavior. The Business Review, Cambridge,
17(2), 48-60. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com.ezproxylocal.library.nova.edu/
docview/871194190?accountid=6579
Shanghai American School. (2013). SAS core values and mission. Retrieved from http://www.
saschina.org/?page=corevalues_mission
Tabernero, C., Chambel, M. J., Curral, L., & Arana, J. M. (2009). The role of task-oriented
versus relationship-oriented leadership on normative contract and group performance.
Social Behavior and Personality, 37(10), 1391-1404. Retrieved from http://search.pro
quest.com.ezproxylocal.library.nova.edu/docview/209927598?accountid=6579
Taleb, H. M. (2010). Gender and leadership styles in single-sex academic institutions. The
International Journal of Educational Management, 24(4), 287-302. http://dx.doi.org/10.
1108/09513541011045236
Tannenbaum, R., & Schmidt, W. (1973). How to choose a leadership pattern. Harvard
Business Review, May-June, 162-180. Retrieved from http://www.elcamino.edu/faculty/
bcarr/documents/How%20to%20choose%20a%20leadership%20pattern.pdf
Yukl, G., O'Donnell, M., & Taber, T. (2009). Influence of leader behaviors on the leadermember exchange relationship. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 24(4), 289-299.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/02683940910952697
15
Appendix A
Questionnaires
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
Appendix B
Other Questionnaire Results
28
Table 8
Results from Setting the Tone Questionnaire (Northouse, 2012, pp. 145-146)
Factor
Providing standards of
excellence
Clarifying norms
Building cohesiveness
Providing structure
Setting the Tone
Score
Range
23
High
23
22
22
High
High
High
Table 9
Results from Responding to Members of the Out-Group Questionnaire (Northouse, 2012, pp.
167-168)
Out-group score
Responding to Members of the Out-Group
Score
46
Range
Average
Table 10
Results from Conflict Style Questionnaire (Northouse, 2012, pp. 203-204)
Style
Avoidance
Competition
Collaboration
Compromise
Accommodation
Conflict Style
Score
20/17
17/17
15/16
15/15
12/14
Range
Strong
Strong
Strong
Average
Average