A520.9.5.RB_SchreterPaul

The areas of discussion are developing personal influences to gain power, characteristics of likeable people, and the ability to use influence both up and down within my organization.

The idea of whether or not I’m comfortable developing sources of personal influence doesn’t bother me. Some of these sources include expertise, personal attraction, effort, and legitimacy. With regards to expertise, this is something I execute regularly. While there is something to be learned every day, my expertise and experience with my job is what sets me apart from all of the newbies (and sometimes higher ranking individuals as well). Generally when there is a job to be done that I am very familiar with, I use my knowledge to guide others into the successful completion of the job. This is something that usually happens in general with my job; whoever has the most experience takes over, regardless of rank.

Attraction is another one that I take advantage of, or at least try to. While I already consider myself devilishly sexy, just kidding, there are aspects of my grooming standards that I have to uphold (most already set by military regulations). Some additional minor things I do to set myself apart is take showers every day, shave every day, and wear clean clothes every day. While this may seem like basic things everyone should already be doing, sometimes you’d be surprised at the people I work with.

Effort is something I showed early on in my deployment to a great deal. I had nothing else to worry about so I went 110% at my job in order to get the job done quickly and effectively. Although I will admit after starting school and taking two classes, my efforts at work as lessened with the additional stress I’ve induced into my personal life.

Legitimacy is about showing behavior that is consistent with organizational values. Together, safe, and in accordance with; the core values of my organization. By exhibiting behaviors in accordance with these core values, I am seen as someone who is able to conform to the values of the organization and therefore be more likely to be accepted by organizational members.

So what about the characteristics of likable people? Some of these include:

• Support an open, honest, and loyal relationship

• Foster intimacy by being emotionally accessible

• Provide unconditional, positive regard and acceptance

• Endure some sacrifices if the relationship should demand them

• Provide social reinforcement in the form of sympathy or empathy

• Engage in the social exchanges necessary to sustain a relationship

This is something that I can improve upon myself, but one area that I see myself excelling in is the ability to show empathy towards others. I may not be in their shoes, but understanding what it’s like allows them to be “heard.” One area of improvement though would be the engagement of social exchanges necessary to sustain a relationship. Self-induced overload with work and school makes this a bit difficult, but there is always room for improvement.

Managing my relationship with my boss is something that I’ve seen drastic improvement over the course of this deployment. Early on while I considered myself to be one of the hardest working, I didn’t keep my boss informed of my progress on various jobs which kept him out of the loop and susceptible to blind spots of potential problems and hazards that arise. This wasn’t something that I was aware of I was doing and since realization, have made sure to keep him in the loop of everything so that he won’t get blindsided and has time to prepare for anything that can arise. 

A511.8.3.RB_SchreterPaul

                Gender based discrimination has been a hot topic for many years and is something that takes place even in today’s world. There are many reasons as to why it happens and only by self-awareness can we try to do something about it. There are three areas of Rosabeth Moss Kanter’s discussion that I would like to reflect upon: Sex-based discrimination of top jobs, the preference for social similarity, and the feminine advantage.

                The first area to discuss is the idea of sex-based discrimination amongst top jobs. Kanter mentions that “it’s just getting up to the very peak has still been an issue – I think one other hidden sources of discrimination that still goes on in many companies is sort of informal and behind the scenes, when there’s a discussion in private conversation about, well, who are the people that we should put in certain positions and then, well, she isn’t quite as dedicated or that we love the fact that she has a family and we’re very family friendly. We don’t want to take away from the family and so they don’t even give the women a choice.” (Harvard Business Review, 2010) This shows that there is discrimination amongst people to assume that women want to make family a priority over their careers. This is completely unfair to assume and eliminates the possibility of a perfectly good candidate. Yukl mentions that “only a small number of nations have a female head of state, and the number of women in top executive positions in large business organizations is also very small.” (Yukl, 2013) This provides further evidence that links Kanter’s ideas to Yukl’s text.

                The second area to discuss is the preference for social similarity. Kanter says that “people trust judgment of those who resemble themselves – [for example] people of similar ethnic groups or who are also male.” (Harvard Business Review, 2010) What this means is that people have a natural tendency to want to stick to those who are like themselves. Since the majority of top leaders are male, they’ll have a natural tendency to choose other male leaders. A separate study has also shown that “people seek out others who are similar to them because the interaction is smoother and more pleasant.” (Dallas, 2011) When it comes to choosing someone to work with or choosing a successor, we not only want to choose someone who thinks the same, but we want to choose someone who is going to take command smoothly and pleasantly. By introducing someone out of this social similarity group, friction is created.

                Finally a third area to discuss is the feminine advantage. There’s this idea that “women are more concerned with consensus building, inclusiveness, and interpersonal relations; they are more willing to develop and nurture subordinates and share power with them. Women are believed to have more empathy, rely more on intuition, and be more sensitive to feelings and the quality of relationships.” (Yukl, 2013) Due to this idea, there is a bias to what positions most women can fill at the top ranks. Kanter mentions that “women, even at high levels, are still often disproportionately found in people oriented jobs.” (Harvard Business Review, 2010) On the contrary, men are often found is risk oriented jobs. This further emphasizes the biases belief that women are naturally more suited towards people oriented jobs.

                Gender based discrimination comes in many ways and the three that I discussed are: Sex-based discrimination of top jobs, the preferences for social similarity, and the female advantage. There are many aspects that contribute to this type of discrimination and its social awareness that’s required for society to recognize that this type of discrimination is occurring. By further emphasizing and talking about this type of discrimination can we hope to one day remove it from our society as a whole.

References

Dallas, M. E. (2011). People Tend to Choose Friends Just Like Themselves. Retrieved from http://consumer.healthday.com/general-health-information-16/friendship-health-news-324/people-tend-to-choose-friends-just-like-themselves-656977.html

Harvard Business Review. (2010). Women, Ambition and (Still) the Pay Gap. Retrieved from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EhquUOlBuOY&feature=youtu.be&t=5s

Yukl, G. (2013). Leadership in Organizations. New Jersey: Pearson.

A520.7.3.RB_SchreterPaul

Write a blog entry on the significance, importance, and/or impact of having a coach and/or a mentor to help you in your professional journey.

                Mentoring in the Air Force has a significant and important role in helping Airmen develop professionally. It has played a role in my professional journey from becoming an apprentice to becoming a journeyman. I’ll explain the significance mentoring has on the Air Force and then how it has played a role in my professional journey.

                Mentoring plays a significant role in the development of Airmen within the Air Force. The goal of mentoring “has shifted to focus on helping anyone gain new insights and abilities.” (Emelo, 2011) This is especially true when anyone first joins the workforce and works towards becoming a journeyman. This is done by on-the-job training and is performed by any variety of peoples within a flight. These peoples “are simply available for the moment in time to offer expert knowledge on a specific topic.” (Emelo, 2011) By taking an apprentice under their arms, a more experienced person is able to share their knowledge and improve the skills of the lesser experienced.

                The impact mentoring has played a role on me is similar to what was just explained. The first impact was in regards to on-the-job training. When I first started my career in the Air Force I was always matched up with someone with more experience. My very first job was to launch out a jet and it was done by having one of my peers take me out and show me step by step what needs to get done. There have been other cases as well two years later where a jet would be hard broke for a particular problem I never experienced before, however maybe a week prior a similar problem occurred with another jet. I would then consult with the person who solved the issue while they would mentor me into gaining new insights about the problem.

                In the Air Force, mentoring plays a significant role in the professional development of its Airmen. It has also played a significant role in my own professional development as well. It is a skill and ability that has been instilled into the culture that will forever foster an environment of mentorship between the more experienced personnel to the lesser experienced.

References

Emelo, R. (2011). Creating a New Mindset Guidelines for Mentorship in Today's Workplace. T + D, 44.

A511.7.3.RB_SchreterPaul

                Self-reflection is always one of the more difficult tasks to do, however with it one can identify what makes them different amongst their peers and “learn to use these differences to their advantage in a leadership role.” (Goffee & Jones, 2006) Bill Gates used his geekiness to stand out, Harvey-Jones used his personal appearance, and Carol Browne’s care for the patient was bar none. The two aspects that I’ll reflect upon in this blog is my quiet demeanor and how I take personal time to helping those that need it.

                The first aspect that distinguishes me is my quiet, modest demeanor. The majority of people can be said to be extroverted with a minority being introverted. A lot of my peers say some really unfiltered thoughts sometimes (which contribute little to no value to anything productive). By filtering what I say and only making contributions that add value, it could potentially add more weight with everything I say in the future.

                The second aspect that distinguishes me is how much I spend time taking care of those that need help. The idea behind Servant Leadership is to take care of your followers; to attend to their needs to become healthier, wiser, and more willing to accept their responsibilities. (Yukl, 2013) My volunteer duties as a Victim’s Advocate allow me to tend to the needs and health of those that were affected by sexual assault. By looking out for them and being there, they can recover to a normal, working life.

                The two aspects that I believe distinguish myself compared to my peers is my quiet demeanor and how I take the time to help those in need. Many other leaders and famous CEO’s has their own unique ways of standing out, this is mine. By realizing what it is about my personality that I normally do, I can use it to my advantage to stand out, increase my potential, and sticking to my core values.

References

Goffee, R., & Jones, G. (2006). Getting personal on the topic of leadership. Human Resource Management International Digest, 32-34.

Yukl, G. (2013). Leadership in Organization. New Jersey: Pearsn.

               

A511.6.3.RB_SchreterPaul

Vision is an important aspect for change within an organization. Whether a complete restructuring of the organization is required or just a simple performance boost, vision is what’s going to compel people to put forth that little bit of extra effort. Various articles and texts explain the importance of creating a vision which creates the meaning in someone’s work.

“Those who succeed at creating meaning – either on their own or with the help of their boss – tend to work harder, more creatively, and with more tenacity, giving the companies that employ them a leg up in the marketplace.” (Ulrich & Ulrich, 2010) This shows that meaning within one’s own work is a huge motivator towards excellence. It is said that “leaders who help shape a vision that is engaging to others, who weave the stories that help people make sense of the past and imagine the future, and who tap into the unique desires and values of individuals engage people’s hearts as well as their heads and hands.” (Ulrich & Ulrich, 2010) Finding something unique that connects the people with the vision is the responsibility and goal of the leader. The difference between good and great is only a finger width apart and that difference may only be one vision away.

“Success is more likely if leaders articulate a vision of a better future that is attractive enough to justify the sacrifices and hardships the change will require.” (Yukl, 2013) This shows that excellence isn’t free and that people need to be compelled into their work. By creating a vision, it “provides hope for a better future and the faith that it will be attained someday.” (Yukl, 2013) People need to know that their accomplishing something for the work that they put in and that it’s not going to be a wasted or under appreciated effort.

Vision is what adds meaning to someone’s work and meaning is what gives people the drive to accomplish what they have to do. The great thing about this is that the vision can come at any level within the organization which means that leadership can spawn from any level within the organization. A commander whom I quite respect once told me, “the difference between good and great, is just this much.”

            

References

Ulrich, D., & Ulrich, W. (2010). Getting Beyond Engagement to Creating Meaning at Work. HBR Blog Network.

Yukl, G. (2013). Leadership in Organization. New Jersey: Pearsn.

A520.6.5.RB_SchreterPaul

The way I view a task-facilitating role and a relationship-building role is along a scale. On one end of this scale is a task-facilitating extreme while on the other end of this scale is a relationship-building extreme. In reflecting how I generally approach my own role in teams, I consider myself to generally fall into a task-facilitating role. That said, that doesn’t mean I don’t focus on relationship-building as well. For this week’s blog I am going to reflect on two areas where I exhibit task-facilitating qualities and one area where I exhibit relationship-building qualities.

The first area where I exhibit task-facilitating qualities is in the aspect of information seeking. Often times I find myself trying to gather all the information I can before committing to a solution. Whenever someone doesn’t have all the information they need, they “shotgun[1]” a part and hope for the best. This is something I try to avoid at all costs, as it wastes a lot of time and money. Most times when jets land and squawk a problem, the jets fixed by the next day for the next round of sorties. However one jet that I was working on had been grounded for several days due to a troublesome radio issue. Since no one really knew what the problem was, I got everyone involved by asking relevant questions in trying to diagnose the real culprit.

The second area where I believe to exhibit task-facilitating qualities is in the area of direction giving. When it comes to the harder broke jets that actually require troubleshooting, people often look up to me to point the direction on where we should go next. To continue the story of the radio issue, supposedly every part relevant to the issue was changed by the previous shift and yet they said the problem remained. This caused my team members to be absolutely baffled and unsure of where to go. This is where I stepped in and said since the other shift changed every part, we need to run up the jet again and verify that the problem still remained. This caused us to reveal that the jet had a similar problem from before, but it was in fact very different in such minor ways. I then pointed us in the direction that certain parts needed to be changed again because of the possibility that they came bad from the warehouse.

One area where I exhibit a more relationship-building role is in the sense of empathizing. My job can be a rather frustrating one and people need to vent their frustrations. I’ve learned from experience that simply having someone listen to you and understand your emotions can be very relieving, even if you still feel heated. Again in regards to the radio issue, the Sargent I was with became very frustrated because it was hard to evaluate what the culprit was for this issue. I empathized with him and shared my similar frustrations, then my task-facilitating qualities kick in and I start to offer possible solutions and guidance that could possibly be causing the issue.

I do believe that I exhibit more of a task-facilitating role in most of my groups that I take part in, however when needed I take a break, use a more relationship-building role to build the team back together, then change gears again and focus on accomplishing the mission. For me improving team cohesion and collaboration has always been the more difficult role to play, so instead I put most of my efforts into completing the task. However I also recognize that sometimes the task isn’t going to get done unless everyone on the team is 100% there, so the need for a relationship-building role is also crucial.

---

[1] The term “shotgun” is used to describe picking a random part and hoping it fixes the problem. Much like how someone can use a shotgun, aim blindly, and hope it hits their target.

A511.5.3.RB_SchreterPaul

What was the point of the research?

The point of the research was to figure out if transformational leadership can take place in long distant relationships where face-to-face occurrences might not be as feasible of an option.

What were the hypotheses?

The hypothesis in the first study was that transformational leadership communication style will have a positive relationship with job satisfaction and interpersonal justice.

They hypothesized in the second experiment that emails containing charisma or intellectually stimulating messages would cause higher levels of motivation and increased performance.

What was the research method used?

The research method used in the first study was to use a vignette approach and to split up what participants were exposed with into three different categories: transformational leadership, management-by-exception, and laissez-faire.

The research method of the second group was to split people up into receiving a charismatic email, an intellectual stimulation email, a neutral email, or a transformational email (containing both elements of charisma and intellectual stimulation.

Were the results supportive of the research goals?

The results of the first study were supportive of the hypotheses first predicted.

The results showed that charismatic emails improved individual performance but had no effect on motivation. Intellectual stimulation emails improved both individual performance and individual motivation. As far as group performance goes, both charismatic and intellectual stimulating emails improved performance.

Of what value was the research?

Transformational leadership can occur in long distant relationships with employees, subordinates, peers, etc. Research shows that people can pick up on different leadership styles in emails. In order to get the best of all worlds, including motivation, performance, and job satisfaction, transformational leadership styles should be used in all aspects whether it be face to face, emails, or other forms of communication.

Bibliography

Remote transformational leadership. (2002). Leadership and Organization Development Journal, 163-171.

A520.5.3.RB_SchreterPaul

There are a few differences in the way the book support empowerment and how the article supports empowerment. Each have the underlying same goal of empowering ones employees, but how they go about it slightly differs. To reflect some of the concepts of this week I’ll talk about the emotional side of empowerment, the biases towards different people side of empowerment, and the resources side of empowerment.

                One aspect that the book brings up is in terms of the emotional side of things. The book says clearly emotional arousal is a must, to which it defines “emotional arousal [as a] means [of] replacing negative emotions such as fear, anxiety, or crabbiness with positive emotions such as excitement, passion, or anticipation.” (Whetten & Cameron, 2013) This shows that by having negative emotions associated with the empowering action, that it won’t be received as enthusiastically, if not negatively. Think of it like sending a squad of men across “no man's land" and knowing that if they get killed, so will you. It’s not exactly going to make them feel all too happy about being empowered to their deaths. Instead positive emotions should be associated with the action so that they can be received in warming hands. A person needs to want to be empowered, not have it forced upon them.

                One aspect that the article differs is the way it suggests of differentiating people and not to treat them universally equally the same. It is said that “managers will empower employees more effectively if they acknowledge that there are differences among employees.” (Forrester, 2000) This shows that not everyone is capable of accepting the same amount of power, they are not ready. Instead team leaders need to delegate to their subordinates as they are ready to accept it. Now when they do accept it, they should also be made sure to be given all the necessary resources as well.

                Both the book and the article articulate how important it is to provide the proper resources towards those being empowered. The book mentions that “managers attempting to enhance other people’s empowerment by providing them with needed resources will ensure that they receive adequate and ongoing training and development experiences.” (Whetten & Cameron, 2013) This shows that there is some synergy with what was previously said in the article. When subordinates receive the training that they require, then can they be ready to accept empowerment. The article emphasized “skills need to be built, relationships formed, technology adapted, organizations reshaped, systems modified.” (Forrester, 2000) This shows that empowerment isn’t free and that the organization needs to be ready for it at all levels.

                I went over the emotional aspects, the not-everyone-is-the-same aspects, and the resources aspects of implementing and empowering subordinates. It is important to realize that these aspects alone will not set up a successful environment for empowerment, however it does point out some of the minute differences between two sources of information. By gathering many different aspects and ideas, can one better grasp the idea of fostering an environment to better suite an empowered culture.

References

Forrester, R. (2000). Empowerment: Rejuvenating a potent idea. The Academy of Management Executive, 67-80.

Whetten, D., & Cameron, K. (2013). Developing Mangement Skills. New Jersey: Pearson.