Nelson Mandela is know for being one of the most influential people in the world today. He became one of the most influential people because he was part of the radical change in South Africa that abolished segregation.
Nelson Mandela was part of the anti-apartheid movement and was the leading force behind the movement. In 1962, he was arrested for sabotage and sentence for a life term. While being in jail Nelson never gave up on what he believed in, he stood by is morals and values. Even when the prison officials offered to let him go in exchange for him to stop preaching his ideas, he refused and remained in jail. He was released 27 years later in 1990, where he led his party to a peaceful negotiation for a multiracial democracy and later won the Nobel Peace Prize.
Mandela is a perfect example of being a very successful authentic leader. To be a good authentic leader you need understand your values and have a clear idea of who you are and how you are going to get the job done in the right way.
As an example with Mandela, even though he was put in jail for fighting against the government and was given the opportunity to get out as long as he stopped protesting, he refused and stood next to his values. This is what authentic leaders need to do, when pressed with a difficult situation you stand by your values. By standing by what he believed in, he was able to gain support from a large group of people and later abolished segregation from South Africa.
Thursday, October 27, 2011
Tuesday, October 25, 2011
Path-Goal Theory
Path—goal theory is used by almost every successful leader. According to our book, “path—goal theory is designed to explain how leaders can help subordinates along the path to their goals by selecting specific behaviors that are best suited to subordinates’ needs and to the situation in which subordinates are working.” I read an article a few weeks ago that stated Steve Jobs was a great leader because he was able to direct and motivate subordinates. Although Steve Jobs was not seen as the most personable leader, I believe he was a good example of a path—goal leader.
Steve Jobs defined the goals of Apple. He wanted Apple to be number one in innovation and wanted employees to “think differently.” I believe this “think differently” approach helped remove obstacles for subordinates. Most companies want employees to do exactly what they’re told, but Steve Jobs and Apple wanted employees to think outside the box and “think differently.” Obstacles were removed and employees were given free reign to think outside the box, providing a boost for Apple’s innovation. Steve Jobs also provided support for subordinates. He supported new ideas that subordinates came up with and this helped make things like the iPod and iPad so successful.
To be a successful path—goal leader a leader must be directive, supportive, participative, and achievement oriented. The leader must be able to adapt and must realize what drives the subordinate. If a subordinate needs to have control on a project, the leader must be participative and provide involvement. On the other hand, if a subordinate has a need for affiliation, the leader must be supportive and provide nurturance.
The path—goal theory is important because it allows the leader to see what behaviors affect the subordinate positively or negatively. Path—goal theory allows the leader to change their leadership style based on the subordinates’ personality.
Monday, October 24, 2011
Rudy Guiliani
This blog was designed for us to discuss the good, bad or ugly leaders. But what happens when the leader is all of the above? As we discussed in class one of them was Rudy Guiliani. At the time he was elected Mayor of New York City, the city was thought to be "ungovernable." When he took over as Mayor, he did not take the usual leadership approach of soft, he used the same approach as he did as a lawyer. He took a hard approach and worked on big and small issues.
September 11, 2001 is one of the days where everyone remembers what they were doing at the exact moment the tragedy happened. At a time where most people would stay in their office and direct people from there, Guiliani went to the streets and was right where the action took place. He could be sympathetic one moment and then strict the very next. Rudy Guiliani responded as a transformational leader. This leadership theory involves emotions, values, ethics, and standards which were all present during and after Sept. 11 2001.
Before Sept. 11 Guilinani was not always liked. He did reduce crime, but he was also looked at as being hypocritical. He was accused of having a police department who were racially profiling people such as african americans. He was also accused of being too distracted by marital and health problems to be effective at his job.
However, after the attacks many people changed their view on his leadership abilities. He was no longer seen as a mayor who went after petty instances, but he was seen as this great leader that people needed in a time of despair. He was strict and stern, but he was also sympathetic and helping when he needed to be.
Transformational leadership can be defined as a process of engaging with others to create a connection that increases motivation and morality in both the leader and the follower. Guiliani demonstrated this ability at this time of need. He was charismatic and he had the trust of his followers which is important when you are a leader.
Even though this situation made Guiliani more of an emergent leader, it shows that he truly was a great leader and that sometimes situations bring out the true leadership in people. His leadership skills go along with the strengths of this theory. The leadership shown was shown as a process. Articles were published on an on-going basis during the following weeks/months of the attack. He did not just chose a time and make a decision, it took alot of decisions and time to prove his ability. He had to communicate with his followers and he had to realize the situation and what everyone was going through in order to effectively say what he wanted to.
September 11, 2001 is one of the days where everyone remembers what they were doing at the exact moment the tragedy happened. At a time where most people would stay in their office and direct people from there, Guiliani went to the streets and was right where the action took place. He could be sympathetic one moment and then strict the very next. Rudy Guiliani responded as a transformational leader. This leadership theory involves emotions, values, ethics, and standards which were all present during and after Sept. 11 2001.
Before Sept. 11 Guilinani was not always liked. He did reduce crime, but he was also looked at as being hypocritical. He was accused of having a police department who were racially profiling people such as african americans. He was also accused of being too distracted by marital and health problems to be effective at his job.
However, after the attacks many people changed their view on his leadership abilities. He was no longer seen as a mayor who went after petty instances, but he was seen as this great leader that people needed in a time of despair. He was strict and stern, but he was also sympathetic and helping when he needed to be.
Transformational leadership can be defined as a process of engaging with others to create a connection that increases motivation and morality in both the leader and the follower. Guiliani demonstrated this ability at this time of need. He was charismatic and he had the trust of his followers which is important when you are a leader.
Even though this situation made Guiliani more of an emergent leader, it shows that he truly was a great leader and that sometimes situations bring out the true leadership in people. His leadership skills go along with the strengths of this theory. The leadership shown was shown as a process. Articles were published on an on-going basis during the following weeks/months of the attack. He did not just chose a time and make a decision, it took alot of decisions and time to prove his ability. He had to communicate with his followers and he had to realize the situation and what everyone was going through in order to effectively say what he wanted to.
Wednesday, October 19, 2011
Style, Situational, and Skills Approach of Leaders
I wanted to go off of the chapters involving style, situational, and skills approach and look at different leaders of our past that were ethical and unethical and see if there were any differences between them.
First, let's look at Martin Luther King, Jr. When looking at the skills model, motivation was the key to his individual attribute. He had the dream that inspired everybody. He also was great with problem-solving skills and social judgement skills. He was able to get all these people to work with him and follow him to pursue his dream.
When looking at the styles approach, I believe he was very relationship oriented. This means he had much concern for the people. Finally, the situational approach played a part in Martin Luther King Jr. leadership. When looking at the four leadership styles, i believe he was mostly using the coaching style. He was a very supportive person, however directed people with his speeches on the direction people need to go.
Now let's look at a unethical leader, for example Rod Blagojevich. As former governor of Illinois, he had some struggles in his position that led to his departure, as well as many court trials. He might have been a knowledgeable guy, but his problem-solving skills were weak some would say, as well as his social judgement skills which I believe were horrible. This led him to a horrible leadership outcome of, pretty much no good outcome whatsoever. He seemed to only care about himself, as you can imagine with this case of him selling the seat that Obama once had to get money, so he wasn't very concerned for the people.
I think there is a big difference between ethical and unethical leaders in society. These are just two examples, but you can clearly see the main difference is between the concern for people. I think most unethical leaders are only concerned about themselves, whereas ethical leaders are looking to achieve great things not only for themselves, but for society or a group of people.
First, let's look at Martin Luther King, Jr. When looking at the skills model, motivation was the key to his individual attribute. He had the dream that inspired everybody. He also was great with problem-solving skills and social judgement skills. He was able to get all these people to work with him and follow him to pursue his dream.
When looking at the styles approach, I believe he was very relationship oriented. This means he had much concern for the people. Finally, the situational approach played a part in Martin Luther King Jr. leadership. When looking at the four leadership styles, i believe he was mostly using the coaching style. He was a very supportive person, however directed people with his speeches on the direction people need to go.
Now let's look at a unethical leader, for example Rod Blagojevich. As former governor of Illinois, he had some struggles in his position that led to his departure, as well as many court trials. He might have been a knowledgeable guy, but his problem-solving skills were weak some would say, as well as his social judgement skills which I believe were horrible. This led him to a horrible leadership outcome of, pretty much no good outcome whatsoever. He seemed to only care about himself, as you can imagine with this case of him selling the seat that Obama once had to get money, so he wasn't very concerned for the people.
I think there is a big difference between ethical and unethical leaders in society. These are just two examples, but you can clearly see the main difference is between the concern for people. I think most unethical leaders are only concerned about themselves, whereas ethical leaders are looking to achieve great things not only for themselves, but for society or a group of people.
Thursday, September 1, 2011
Introduction
Hello, our team is team one. The team members include Brad Schneider, Lauren Wildman, Steven Kolpack, and Jordan Landwehr.
Our blog is about the good, the bad, and the ugly of different leaders of corporations. We will discuss the issues of ethical and unethical leaders and how they influenced their businesses and the business world.
Examples of different leaders we might talk about is Steve Jobs from Apple and former Governor of Illinois, Rob Blagojevich on their ethical or unethical behaviors.
We invite others to give their opinions on ethical and unethical actions of different leaders.
Our blog is about the good, the bad, and the ugly of different leaders of corporations. We will discuss the issues of ethical and unethical leaders and how they influenced their businesses and the business world.
Examples of different leaders we might talk about is Steve Jobs from Apple and former Governor of Illinois, Rob Blagojevich on their ethical or unethical behaviors.
We invite others to give their opinions on ethical and unethical actions of different leaders.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)