Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Characteristic of introvert and extrovert
Characteristic of introvert and extrovert
Characteristic of introvert and extrovert
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Characteristic of introvert and extrovert
Conscientiousness. Ursula Burns exhibits a high degree of conscientiousness. She has proven herself to be reliable and dependable, a fiercely loyal Xerox employee. She has always been focused on goals and responsibilities, achieving them with hard work and determination.
Extraversion. Someone with more of this characteristic is outgoing and effervescent. By her own admission, Ursula Burns is more on the introverted end of this spectrum. She is not comfortable with all the attention just for being “the first” in her role as CEO. (Bell, 2011) She is not one who is effervescent in her presentation, but one who is thoughtful and even-keeled, with a sense of humor and clear sense of purpose.
Agreeableness. At the higher end of this continuum, someone who is agreeable is warm, kind, and compassionate. Ursula exhibits these traits. She expresses caring for and interest in others. She talks frequently of being kind, while still always being real and authentic. After
…show more content…
Another way to look at Ursula Burns’ management style is through the lenses of the University of Michigan and Ohio State studies. The University of Michigan studies on leadership determined that there are three critical behaviors to being an effective leader – task- or production-oriented, relationship- or people-oriented, and participative. (Michigan Studies, n.d.)
Participative leaders manage people as groups as well as individually, using team meetings that are facilitated rather than dictatorial or directive in nature, one-on-one discussions, and cohesion to support the manager’s responsibility for achieving results. (Michigan Studies, n.d.) This was addressed as part of the discussion on the paternalistic approach on page fourteen. Her staff comes together in participative team meetings while also having one-on-one time with her. The same is true of employees who have the opportunity to address their concerns in employee
In the past, decision making was a consensus among managers. They would debate for months on specific decisions that would impact each department. This type of participative leadership was what had worked in the past and driven
A participative leader consults with followers, obtains their ideas and opinions, and integrates their suggestions into the decisions about how the group or organization will proceed” (Northouse, 2016, p.118). As a participative leader, Vida often consults with her staff, obtains their ideas and opinions, and is open minded to their suggestions. For example letting us have flexible hours, because most of us were taking other classes, getting our ideas for recording sessions, and even choosing what snacks we wanted to have available at the
You can lead a horse to water, but you cannot make him drink is a proverb I have heard since I was young. Leadership is the skill of influencing people to accomplish goals (Huber, 2014). In today’s world with policy and technological changes the leaders must use their leadership skills to not only get the horse to the water, have him drink, but also do it with a smile an invite others to join him. Leaders use a variety of styles to accomplish their goals. I will discuss the leadership style that I utilize most often, how my style relates to leadership theories and the work type environment it is most useful in.
The agreeableness linked to altruism, nurturance, caring and emotional support versus competitiveness, hostility, indifference, self-centeredness, spitefulness and jealousy (Howard & Howard, 1995).
If the inputs are seen as used, employees are likely to feel as though they had a positive impact; if the inputs are consistently rejected, employees are likely to feel that their time has been wasted. Participative leaders clearly decentralize authority. Participative decisions are not unilateral, as with the autocrat, because they use
Zaleznik, A. 1977. 'Managers and leaders: Are they different?', Harvard Business Review, 55, 3, pp.67-78, Business Source Complete, EBSCOhost, viewed 18 November 2013.
The significance of leadership style is a subject that has drawn much contentious discussions. The term “leadership” has various meanings that are relative to the educator (Stogdill, 1974). This paper defines leadership as the process through which a person, a manager in this case, manipulates the others towards the realization of a certain objective (Stogdill, 1974). Most studies in leadership have been directed towards government agencies, the military and business organizations with little attention directed towards sports. However one generally accepted conclusion is that the style of leadership used by an organization has an effect on its performance outcome. Leadership style has a direct impact both on the employees and the general success of the organization (Eisenbeiss, Knippenberg, and Boerner, 2008). It influences the effectiveness and execution of institutional strategies. Leaders are common actors, usually referred to as managers, in any institution including Golf club organizations. Leaders manipulate employees around them so as to obtain the utmost benefit from the resources of an organization. To achieve this they employ the use of various styles including autocratic, bureaucratic, democratic, charismatic, situational, transactional, and transformational leadership styles. These management styles can either impact on the employees positively or negatively. This essay therefore seeks to examine the impacts of these leadership styles on employee with reference to golf club organizations.
Halal and Brown (1981) write that participative management may not only increase productivity and decrease operating costs associated with low morale, it may enhance flexibility through lowering the decision making process to the operational level. This is because the operational level is where the actual work is completed. The manager or supervisor does not always have the best picture of how a process is completed, and they can get lost in the details. The operational level knows the details, thus to work together collaboratively is key. According to Mooney (n.d.) the participative leader empowers others. This is someone who is willing to share the spotlight by giving their employees the opportunity to make major decisions. They are also there to support these workers when they make mistakes and need help in solving problems. This leader invests much of their own success by placing it in the hands of those they
This research has asked us to look into three different styles of management and find real life examples of companies or individuals who have or are currently using such styles of management. To begin we will take a look into the use of an autocratic style of management versus a participative. In this portion we will look into Leona Helmsley and her chain of hotels. Once this potion is completed, our next section will be looking into a centralized style of management versus a decentralized style. In this section of the research, we will be looking into Apple Inc and how they have built an empire with a centralized style of managing philosophy. Finally, in the final section of the research we will be taking a look at how Google has created an informal environment in which employees have direct access to executives and have the ability to share thoughts and ideas that are taken serious and to the heart.
function. In the twenty-first century, more businesses and companies required their workers to work more on team operations rather than individually. One of the most effective elements to those teams’ success is its leaders. Without the management of a strong leader, a team can only go so far. In a startling statistic found by USA Weekend, 40 percent of all new managers are out of a job within the first 18 months. However, beyond the obvious reasons mentioned in the article, such as termination or voluntary leave, the simple facts are that they were not prepared to work in partnerships and teamwork.
(Blake & Mouton, 2002). The leadership grid combined the “concerns of production” and the “concerns for people” (Leadership, 2008) into five alternate behavior theories: improvised management, country club management, task management, middle of the road management, and team management. Improvised management behavior is when a leader emphasizes no concern about people or production. A leader with country club management behavior emphasizes concern for people but little to no concern for production, while task management behavior leaders stress on production and not people. The middle of the road management behavior produces a leader who tries to balance concern for production and people; whereas, a leader exhibiting Team management behavior is able to exhibit high concern for both production and people (Leadership Theories and Studies,
Over the course of my professional career in different organizations in the past three years, I have worked under many managers. This has been a learning curve for me to understand the different managing styles and leadership characteristics of people. One of the managers whom I worked under, was the lead in a government project which also happened to be my last project before I took a break for continuing my studies, is a person I admire till date. I learned several life lessons in addition to the technical subject associated with the industry. This paper demonstrates the leadership styles exhibited by my manager with suitable examples.
Throughout my life, I have been fortunate to have many opportunities to take on leadership roles, and to use these roles to influence others in very positive ways. After taking the leadership quizzes or survey, I was able to determine that my personal leadership style is Participative. Participative style is the leadership style where a leader gives team the opportunity to wholly take part in
So what does this definition mean to me? First, it means that leaders who embrace a participative leadership style, values and involves their entire team. Second, it means leaders work closely with their team members, focusing on building relationships and rapport. Lastly, it means that leaders allow their team to assist in the decision making process, accepting their input and allowing them to share their ideas. As a leader, I would incorporate this style of leadership when leading project teams because it creates a level of trust between a leader and its members. In addition, this leadership style creates motivation and empowerment. When team member’s skills are acknowledged and their opinions are being valued, they see how their contributions aid in completing the final project goal and take ownership. This type of leadership also provides higher levels of motivation and better strategies and solutions because a variety of people contribute with different perspectives and ideas. Although the team leader is required to give up some control, I believe that the motivational benefits of doing so are greater than with other leadership styles. According to Lam, Xu & Chan (2015), “many practicing managers acknowledge the potential motivational benefits of participative management practice, and value its performance implications” (p. 836). I would
“I suppose leadership at one time meant muscles, but today it means getting along with people” Mahatmi Gandhi said. A great leader is one who inspires other people to work and makes their dreams real. Participative leader which defined on behavioural leadership theories suggest that leader accepts a decision that is beneficial to everyone as a whole. Other three styles are focusing on the work which leaders try to complete the job in the most effective manner, focusing on the people that people’s happiness is important and they spend their effort to complete job and direct leader which all decisions are made by one person and all other members...