Hello Professor Stuke, This class and the resources were very applicable in the work we did for this course. Every subject we covered was easy to follow and applicable to every assignment. You were always quick to respond to the students when there were questions on assignments or clarification needed. It is very clear that you are passionate about creating future leaders.

I think having the assessments towards the beginning of the course was helpful, in that it provided a baseline of where we were at as growing leaders. You showed us with the materials and articles provided how we can apply what we've learned to our leadership goals. The only suggestion I would give is that you continue teaching these courses with the same enthusiasm you gave us. It was a pleasure being a part of your class.

For my peers, it has been a pleasure working alongside you and getting to know you through your work. Best of luck everyone!

Warm regards, Ashley Wilson

https://my.visme.co/projects/dmprg89e-ashley-wilson-s-leadership-model

After taking the Self Diagnostic Utility (SDU) test, my moral purpose most aligns with ‘Virtue’. The SDU describes someone with this moral purpose as someone who is focused on being the right person. I was relieved to hear this, as I felt my motives were in line with my overall goal in life- which then trickles into how I operate as leader. I truly believe that this creates a sense of authenticity but also trust, which can go a long way when leading others.

One of the strengths listed was “you are trustworthy and have probably found your way to a leadership role”. This statement tells me that honesty and integrity are valuable characteristics of a leader and solidifies how I strive to be as a person.

In the article First Know Yourself, Then Your Team, it states “The lack of fit between a leader’s archetypical role and the context in which he or she operates is a major cause of team and organisational dysfunctionality and executive failure” (Knowledge, 2014, para. 10). This tells me that it is necessary to be authentic. While it is important to be able to adapt your leadership style to that of your team (maturity level), it is more important to remain true to your moral self. As corny as it may seem to some, doing the right thing- morally is the most important thing. I need to feel as though I can lay my head on my pillow with a clear conscience and sometimes that doesn’t always line up with the priorities of the places I have worked in the past. Perhaps that is why I ended up in the Human Services field, it is not as result-driven as it is client-driven. For me, it was important to have my work be in line with my moral compass and my priorities. I do not think that this makes other priorities a bad thing, just simply different. The world needs people driven by different priorities in order to sustain some balance in the work force. I thought the SDU was a very useful tool, the questions were worded in such a way that it allowed for honest answers. You didn’t feel as though you were going to be seen as a “bad person” for choosing answers where the priorities seemed out-of-line with society’s idea of good or bad.

References

Knowledge, I. N. S. E. A. D. (2014, August 20). First Know Yourself, Then Your Team. Retrieved from https://www.forbes.com/sites/insead/2014/08/19/first-know-yourself-then-your-team/#5be9513c5144

(n.d.). Retrieved from https://via.hypothes.is/https://www.kurtstuke.com/SDU/story_html5.html#annotations:rBIlEsc-EempVNPtGZcRaw

I chose this statement because it resonated the most with my overall view of leadership and the various leadership styles that we have discussed. I really don't believe there is ONE correct theory, but I believe Hersey and Blanchard's situational leadership, is most realistic and applicable for the majority of tasks.

On the online article I found- 13 Situational Leadership Advantages and Disadvantages written by Brandon Gaille, he brings up some very valid disadvantages that were not far from some of our earlier discussions on this topic. In fact, some of the points he made I had mentioned in my choice of situational leadership (Hersey and Blanchards’s theory) style in our text book.

“Situational leaders have a skill set, just like any other worker. If the leader is adept at reading changing situations and understands what people need, then they can be useful in their role. If this skill set has not been fully developed for the leader, then their responses will not be as effective. In some situations, the situational leader may do more harm than good because they misread the situation, formulating an answer that is inappropriate.” (2018, Gaille, B, para. 16).

This is a very valid and realistic point. Situational leadership takes on the assumption that the leader is already knowledgeable in reading their team and determining their maturity level. As we all know, this is not always the case. I appreciate that he discusses that it could potentially do more harm than good. However, I still do believe this is the most accommodating and successful style. It allows for much flexibility, which is realistic with our forever changing times.

Gaille, B. (2018, November 12). 13 Situational Leadership Advantages and Disadvantages. Retrieved from https://brandongaille.com/13-situational-leadership-advantages-and-disadvantages/

Raelin, J. A. (2003). Creating leaderful organizations: How to bring out leadership in everyone. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler.

I highlighted this particular statement because whether it is an organization or a leader with a particular vision, it is important that everyone understands how their particular part plays a role in the overall achievement of this vision. This is one way to ensure that individuals you recruited for essential tasks have a sense of “buy-in”.

It is hard exactly to say whether or not gender shapes vision. I believe the answer in part, is dependent upon what the vision actually is. This is a sticky topic for 2019, as I am aware about the gender-neutral arguments that could be presented. However, for me, this is jumping down a rabbit hole. I am going to stick with my instinctual and perhaps, not politically correct stance. Biologically, women are made differently. There is a sense among men in power that women are “too emotional” to make decisions without being influenced by their raging hormones. I don’t necessarily blame men for this initial response, as society has done well to place women in this very narrow box. Some would say that men experience the same issue in almost a reverse fashion. However, times are changing and with information at our fingertips, it is easy to see how roles can and have been reversed. Like anything, this will take time.

“But it also continues to offer a contradictory and confusing picture that illustrates a dissonance between theory and practice. For example, on the one hand, the media and literature illustrate women’s success in leadership, and yet on the other hand, they highlight their inability to succeed” (Stead, 2008, p. 161). This particular quote stood out to me as it resonates partly with my previous statement on society’s impact on the view of a women’s role in leadership. Women want it all yet are unable to succeed. This conflicting information is in part, the root of the problem. If a vision is meant to provide direction, then how could women, with all of their emotions, provide a steadfast and unwavering vision? What time of the month did she make this decision? Did she feel beautiful and “good enough” when she made this decision? Of course, I am being sarcastic, but to be realistic- these questions are not far from the facts.

This can be quickly turned around on men, and as the article Learning from Leading Women’s Experience expresses, there are many organizations today that support and encourage a more democratic (perhaps liberal) environment that women supposedly, more often possess (Stead, 2008). In this case, men are viewed as the underdogs, lacking these apparent traits. On the other hand, there have been instances that woman were viewed as being more “hard” or “strict” as they are believed to be overcompensating in a “man’s line of work”. I’ve been guilty before stating that women cops are more tough than men because they feel as though they have to overcompensate for an image that society assigned them, such as being too soft or emotional. Of course, that is not true across the board and is a very blanketed statement, but the underlying belief originated from a very true standard.

References

Carli, Linda & Eagly, Alice (2007), Women and the Labyrinth of Leadership. Harvard Business Review: https://hbr.org/2007/09/women-and-the-labyrinth-of-leadership

Stead, C. E. (2008, May 20). Learning from Leading Women's Experience: Towards a Sociological Understanding. Sage Publications

Studies, G., & College, G. S. (n.d.). A Leader's Vision. Retrieved from https://via.hypothes.is/https://granite.pressbooks.pub/ld820/chapter/9/#annotations:kHP0yrtyEemlkvNgLYcxfg

In my opinion, The Full-Range Theory of Leadership is the most easily relatable to that of Raelin's leaderful leadership. It is most similar in that it encourages "Intellectual stimulation: the degree to which the leader challenges assumptions, takes risks, and solicits followers' ideas" (para 8). If a leader acts more as a mentor and allows others to grow in their leadership capabilities, they are giving the team members a sense of empowerment. Empowerment increases the motivation of team members and instills a sense of investment and ownership.

"In such a world, we cannot rely on a coterie of subordinates to await their marching orders from detached bosses at the top who have sole possession on problem fixes, even across the remote corners of the organization. We need organizations that empower anyone with the capability and the willingness to assume leadership in the moment in his or her relationships with peers, team members, customers, suppliers, and other organizational partners. Alas, we are in it together. The essence of leadership is collaboration and mutuality" (Raelin, J.A., pg. 19, 2003). This quote stood out to me when comparing Raelin's leaderful leadership to Cultivating Your Leadership Capabilities (n.d). There is a sense of camaraderie that The Full-Range Theory amplifies and "enhances motivation and morale by connecting the employee's sense of identity to a project..."(para 7). This can also be identified in the previous quote I identified. We are looking to empower individuals with capabilities, which inspires motivation.

References

Studies, G., & College, G. S. (n.d.). Theories of effective leadership include trait, contingency, behavioral, and full-range theories. Retrieved from https://via.hypothes.is/https://granite.pressbooks.pub/ld820/chapter/7/#annotations:_mjOiLbHEemiPK9O7acVqw

Raelin, J. A. (2003). Creating leaderful organizations: How to bring out leadership in everyone. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler.

This statement stuck out to me... "...people manage things, but leaders, lead other people." People are not "things" and not meant to be treated as such. I have worked in retail before and it is simply a different environment. I find more "leaders" exist in the human services field. The job is not transactional and deals with peoples lives; sometimes very complicated lives and needs to be handled with tact and care. I believe that some managers have the mind set that they are meant to manage a particular department or area of a company and are looking to achieve a certain number or standard. You see this a lot in retail where most everything is transactional. Yes, some of these managers do have people skills, but at the end of the day they are just there to conduct business and that is to sell people things and ensure that the individuals who work for them can conduct transactions with a smile on their face.

I like that this reading talks about leadership and long-term goals because I think this is a very important distinction. It supports my previous statement about transactional mindset. Managers are meant to ensure that the day to day functions are completed. When dealing with individuals in my field, we are often setting goals for them to grow and planning for their future. It takes people who are care about the future of these individuals to ensure that we at least provide every opportunity possible to make this happen.

I do find that there are departments within my area agency that do need a management style, such as our business office. They are simply ensuring that the individuals we serve are utilizing the hours given within their budget. If the rest of the agency is doing what they are supposed to do and providing the services needed, this can be easily obtained. That's where communication between the "leaders" of each department is so important. If the business office informs the case management department that a client is underutilizing their day program hours, then we can pull a meeting together with the team to see what is causing this gap. It ensure that individuals don't fall between the cracks and go unnoticed and unserved. It also helps us adjust their program accordingly because it is possible that something is not currently working in their program.

Hersey and Blanchard’s Situation Theory in my opinion, is the strongest of three. It takes an intuitive leader to be able to read the maturity level of a team and be able to adapt as a leader. When I took the leadership assessment, many of the questions that were being asked were dependent on the situation- nothing was a sure black and white answer. I think the same concept applies to this leadership model.

Some would say that this theory isn’t completely fool proof because it is impossible to know 100% what the maturity level of the group actually is. Also, the maturity of a group cannot be determined as a whole because everyone is an individual and may work differently in group settings. Another point that could be made is that the maturity level could be dependent on the leadership style, so perhaps the team is reactive in their maturity level to the style of the leader. However, this model should be used by a leader who knows the individuals working on their team. In this way, a leader is more likely to be successful in leading using this model. I do not believe this model would work as well with a new leader and a new team because far too many assumptions could be made.

Spencer, A., & Learning, L. (2019, July 25). Cultivating Your Leadership Capabilities; 10. Situational Leadership. Retrieved from Pressbook: https://granite.pressbooks.pub/ld820/chapter/10/

Being middle management, I found that this a little outdated. However, it does provide a basic structure for how management works. This one statement stuck out to me to be true and most relevant to this day and age. With the Information Age, most anyone can find or learn anything with a cell phone at their fingertips. Communication is so readily available and allows for quick resolution to problems that arise. A decision can be made over the phone and the direction be given by middle management. Perhaps someone who wouldn't typically make that call.

I have to have technical skills when training new case managers on our software system, etc. Conceptual skills are needed at all levels to some extent, at least in my department and field of work. Case managers have to be trusted to see the bigger picture and lead the team and their clients to success.

Many lower level management have moved up into higher level positions and learned conceptual skills along the way. I don't believe it is so black and white.

If I had to choose one style of leadership to describe myself it would be Transformational Leadership. However, there are instances that I can see myself utilizing the other leadership styles as well. It really depends on the situation and who you are dealing with.

There are many "good" factors to being a Transitional Leader. It brings about a sense high moral because it is all inclusive and allows employees at all levels to reach their highest potential. This type of leadership almost comes naturally in the way our case management department is set up. Each case manager has a caseload of about 30 clients. The case managers come to myself and the other supervisor to assist in triaging situations that may arise. We encourage them to navigate the situations on their own and use their instincts. Each week we have a case management meeting that all case managers are required to block out of their schedule. It is a time for us as supervisors to provide pertinent information that may be coming from the state or from our directors. This allows an open flow of communication and an opportunity for questions or concerns to be answered. We start every case management meeting with "positive" case management stories. It gives the team an opportunity to share a positive moment and/or funny story- not just at work but also in their personal lives.

I find, however, that there can be a downfall to this style of leadership and it's not necessarily at the fault of the "leader". I have found that it is an opportune environment for individuals to take advantage of the autonomy of the position. We do not micromanage and rarely we have run into instances that we have had to have difficult conversations about abusing the flexibility of time in the office, etc. It is an opportune position and leadership style to do "just enough" to slide under the radar and get the job done- but how well? We do not micromanage our case managers and trust them to communicate with their teams appropriately. There have been times we have received phone calls and/or emails in regards to a lack of communication or follow through, which is so important in the position.