LDR 531 Week 4 Assignment - Determining Your Perfect Position
LDR 531 Week 4 Assignment - Determining Your Perfect Position
Popular in Course
verified elite notetaker
Popular in Department
This 9 page Study Guide was uploaded by needhelp Notetaker on Monday November 16, 2015. The Study Guide belongs to a course at a university taught by a professor in Fall. Since its upload, it has received 22 views.
Reviews for LDR 531 Week 4 Assignment - Determining Your Perfect Position
Report this Material
What is Karma?
Karma is the currency of StudySoup.
You can buy or earn more Karma at anytime and redeem it for class notes, study guides, flashcards, and more!
Date Created: 11/16/15
Running head: DETERMINING YOUR PERFECT POSITION Assignment: Determining Your Perfect Position YOU’RE NAME LDR/531 DATE NAME OF PROFESSOR DETERMINING YOUR PERFECT POSITION: Leadership is very influential part in the success of any company or organization in global market. If leadership is mediocre, the impact comes on performance. Being apart of free world, I assume my self at the position of leader of my imaginary company. I choose this status for me, after going through with the results of Leadership Performance Quiz. The quiz carried the title of, “What’s My Guidance Approach?” In that quiz the question were given as follows, 1. I encourage initiative, involvement, and innovation from my coworkers. 2. I and my people establish priorities for tasks to be accomplished. 3. I have the skills and resources necessary to perform my tasks effectively. 4. I resolve conflict as it occurs, and consider the best interests of all concerned. 5. I encourage initiative, involvement, and innovation from my coworkers. 6. My people establish priorities for tasks to be accomplished. 7. I delegate responsibility, accountability and authority effectively. 8. I motivate my people to do their best on the job In the first question, I scored 10 marks and in second achieved 14. It shows that I am more tasks oriented then having strong public relation, but 10 marks indicate that I may improve in this field. In the third question, which actually asks that how influential and expert I am, I attained 94 out of 120 marks. It shows that I have capabilities to influence my subordinates and group members. While, the fourth question was little disappointing in the sense that I got 12 out of 20. It means that I should work on my behavior and expertise in the case if any mishap. In the fifth question I received 3 out of 5. It shows that I have low trust on my coworkers, and I should choose those works in which I will able to keep my hegemony. Question sixth brought 56 out of 63, indicating I am successful to win the trust of people. The seventh question gave me 23 out of 24, showing that I am excellent in keeping my subordinates or workers in compact form. In last question, I scored 107 out of 108, demonstrating that I have outstanding administrative expertise to enhance group improvement and may deal with any crises. The company in which I work, having a post of Marketing Coordinator. If it would ask to choose the post of my caliber, I would definitely go with Marketing Manager Position of design studios, at company head offices, looking after the scheduling, stylishness, and execution of every selling and promoting of materials which company creates. The post would definitely demand that my branch work in strict time limiting period, and I would able to control huge number of task at one time, such as, designing the pamphlet, preparation for weekly or daily commercialization, financial planning, internet coverage, small screen campaign, and enlargement of the entire publish and online periodicals, issue by corporation. The post of Marketing Manager is divided into two parts, Task leaning leadership technique People leaning leadership technique The research conducted by Michigan University (Yukl, 2006) gave its findings in following words that, “task oriented managers concentrate on functions such as planning and scheduling the work, coordinating subordinate activities, and providing necessary supplies, equipment, and technical assistance, and guide subordinates in setting “high but realistic performance goals” (p. 54). It suggests that marketing sector which is highly under the pressure of time limits, goes with the 1 approach. While, the second approach does not match with this position because it supports, “showing trust and confidence, acting friendly and considerate, trying to understand subordinate problems, helping to develop subordinates and further their careers, keeping subordinates informed, showing appreciation for subordinates’ ideas, (allowing) considerable autonomy in how subordinates do the work, and providing recognition for subordinates’ contributions and accomplishments” (p. 54). Therefore the marketing department which is so adhere with time may not afford such luxuries. Everyone should be so mature to understand the fragileness of their position and must be focus on work and targets. On the other hand, the Ohio state finding (Yukl, 2006) reveals that they are more close to second approach related to people, because it is responsibility of leader to keep the group members satisfied. But, Michigan research further reveals that there is another approach of marketing manager called as “Participative Leadership”. According to this approach, leader does not look after the every individual of company or organization; rather he makes the groups and keeps in touch with the group leaders. This theory matches a lot with my expectation in this way that I scored one of the highest marks in my leader ship qualities and running the team, in the quiz. According to Yukl, (2006) there is another theory attaches with task orienting and people orienting theory, which is called as “Change Orienting Behavior”. These three works parallel to one another. He considered it as tripletaxonomy nomenclature. He further describes that those are change leaning heads are able to conceive the functional setting and become accustomed to it to have greater achievements. Yukl (2006) has performed tremendous work in this field. This theory goes with his “Highest Conceptualization Organizational Level Theory”. He generated the chart in which he explained the root causes of theories division and evaluated the research techniques. Theories have very miscellaneous nature due to three possible foundations, 1. behaviors cannot be categorize 2. the behavioral pattern are difficult to measure 3. there is not single method of grouping the behaviors He proposed four conceptualization stages, between two individual dyadic factional institutional The first theory describes the traits of leaders with the perspective of psychology but it does not emphasize upon the authority of it on coworkers or subordinates. The second theory highlight the relationship between leader and follower but it talks about single follower only. The factional theory put light on how leader play its part in group and how his strength impacts on group achievements, but it has also drawbacks that it only talks about internal phenomenon of factions. The highest section lies with organization, where effective leaders prove their success in term of market repute and profit. When I talk about my ideal post of manager of design studio, I feel more tilt towards new technology, techniques, man power, and reserves to make the product attractive. Yukl (2006) further described three more leadership hypothesis in this way, 1. organizer versus admirer 2. expressive versus dogmatic 3. general versus possibility The first theory, focus on leader’s quality that how he influence his followers or admirers. The second theory revolves around that how much head or group leader can me more open and expressive, while the second theory tells leaders ship can both be widely accepted and rejected. Here Robbins & Judge (2007) contributed too. They have described five models of contingency, which purpose is to segregate definite conditional variable that show the way to valuable leadership. Fiedler Model Heresy and Blanchard’s Situational Theory LeaderMember Exchange theory PathGoal theory LeaderParticipation Model If I talk about theory number one, it suggests that it is not suitable for me, because it expects the leader having constant approach, while the quiz reveals that I have very dynamic character in this regard. I may go with both task and people leniency theory. Fiedler model mentions another very important article in leadership which is anxiety and tension. According to Robbins & Judge, anxiety plays huge role to destroy all the efforts and hard work on the mean time of application. The second theory highlights the choice of followers for leader that how may follower recognize or refuse the leader but it has no such broad analysis. The third theory describes the movements of followers in and out of groups. Those who are inner part of group must be more close to leader then others. They will keep the secrets and off course liable to many privileges in company. The fourth theory seems impracticable that leaders help his subordinates to achieve their task, because it requires and evidence to prove. The last theory seems impossible to practice. It suggests that a leader should transform his attitude and behavior according to the need of immediate tasks and targets. The field of leadership is very huge and diverse in its nature. It proposed multiple numbers of theories, perspective and approaches. What I discovered is that leaders should go with their natural styles, it will enhance their abilities more and more and generate the automatic benefits for corporate. References Robbins, S. P., & Judge, T. A. (2007). Organizational behavior (12th Ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education. University of Phoenix. (2009). Web link to assessment results: Do I trust others? Retrieved February 10, 2009 from https://ecampus.phoenix.edu/secure/aapd/sas/robbins_sal3v3/sal3v3web.html. University of Phoenix. (2009). Web link to assessment results: Am I good at disciplining others? Retrieved February 10, 2009 from https://ecampus.phoenix.edu/secure/aapd/sas/robbins_sal3v3/sal3v3web.html. University of Phoenix. (2009). Web link to assessment results: Do others see me as trustworthy? Retrieved February 10, 2009 from https://ecampus.phoenix.edu/secure/aapd/sas/robbins_sal3v3/sal3v3web.html. University of Phoenix. (2009). Web link to assessment results: How charismatic am I? Retrieved February 10, 2009 from https://ecampus.phoenix.edu/secure/aapd/sas/robbins_sal3v3/sal3v3web.html. University of Phoenix. (2009). Web link to assessment results: How good am I at building or leading a team? Retrieved February 10, 2009 from https://ecampus.phoenix.edu/secure/aapd/sas/robbins_sal3v3/sal3v3web.html. University of Phoenix. (2009). Web link to assessment results: What’s my leadership style? Retrieved February 10, 2009 from https://ecampus.phoenix.edu/secure/aapd/sas/robbins_sal3v3/sal3v3web.html. Yukl, G. (2006). Leadership in organizations (6th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education.
Are you sure you want to buy this material for
You're already Subscribed!
Looks like you've already subscribed to StudySoup, you won't need to purchase another subscription to get this material. To access this material simply click 'View Full Document'