Hello I have to reply to four of my classmates For my first discussion I have to disagree with one of the students and I have highlighted the one answer to disagree with for the second discussion its
Discussion 1 I agree that the best and most effective form of leadership is one where the leader and his/her decisions are made distanced from the general population of employees. This style of leadership seems to resemble traits of both directive and autocratic style leaderships. Directive leadership is characterized by “implementing guidelines, managing expectations, setting definite performance standards and ensuring that individuals follow rules,” (Neck et al., p.785, 2020). For the responsibilities and control to be centralized toward the top of the hierarchy, there needs to be directive leadership. I think this is the best form of leadership because although one central figure controls the entire ladder of power, there are leaders of smaller groups that can enforce the decisions made by the leader at the top. This would eliminate stress from the leader at the top to enforce rules and regulations all the way to the bottom of the ladder so that the leader can focus on the more important decision-making processes. Assuming that the leader at the top is sane and has the best interest of the employees and the company in mind, the trickle-down form of power described is optimal. Autocratic leadership is a style based on making decisions without asking for suggestions from others (Neck et al., p.785, 2020). For the majority of power to be held at the top of hierarchy means that little attention to suggestions is given at the top. This can prove to be highly effective when it comes to decisions that need to be made urgently or on-the-spot and making decisions through a chain of command is slow and time-consuming. Although I think this is the best and most effective form of leadership, I should add once again that this is only effective if the leader at the top is qualified and trusted to be in that position. Any leader with ill intentions for a company that is granted majority power may not be the best idea. This rule of power also seems to resemble that of our own Democracy here in the US. We have a President who holds the majority of all power but we have leaders and representatives at lower levels of power, like state senators, governors and even members in the House of Representatives that hold some power.  References Neck, C. P., Houghton, J. D., & Murray, E. L. (2020). Organizational behavior: A skill-building approach. Sage. Example of reply ( On this post you have to disagree) Hi Muhammad, Although I disagreed with the given position, you make a very good argument. I agree with you in that a leadership style where there is a leader at the top along with other leaders of smaller groups can be effective. I also liked how you touched upon urgent decisions that need to be made. In this type of situation, I would agree that the person at the top sometimes needs to make a quick decision without the opinions of others. Do you believe that leaders should still be considerate of those at the bottom? Our text mentions the term ‘individualized consideration’ where the leader takes into account the mutual respect, needs and and concern of others (Neck et al., 2018). I feel as though in larger company decisions, this can be beneficial to incorporate into leadership. Neck, C. P., Houghton, J. D., & Murray, E. L. (2018). Organizational behavior      (2nd ed.). Sage Publications.     I disagree with this statement and I do not think that this leadership style is the best and most effective form of leadership. An autocratic leader bases their decisions on their own judgement without asking for suggestions or ideas from others. The textbook also states that autocratic leaders tend to “rely on the power to use their authority to command, reprimand, or intimidate in order to get the desired results from their subordinates”(Neck et al., 2019). By having responsibilities and control centralized at the top of the organizational hierarchy, many valid and essential information is being lost in the decision making process. Without having any say or being able to provide any type of feedback not only decreases the value of meaning one holds towards their job, but also the willingness they have to do it – both factors contributing to motivation. With decreased willingness and meaning associated with one’s job, they are not going to be as motivated to succeed and the overall organizational success will in turn suffer. Christina Lee, M.A., discusses some key contributors to job satisfaction which are, employees having flexibility, opportunities to use their skills and abilities at work, and trust in their employers (2017). In this autocratic type leadership style, there will be little to no flexibility as the leader is likely unlikely to even be aware of anyone else’s concerns, needs, or ideas. Even though people can still be productive under this leadership style, doesn’t mean they are satisfied, or that their creativity is being utilized to contribute to the organization. Creativity is an essential part of organizational success as it leads to innovation, which helps increase overall success for organizations. The textbook brings up an important effect when creativity is promoted and followed by effective leadership, “The contribution from a group of individuals with varying knowledge, skills, backgrounds, and experiences can be a powerful force in creating innovative ideas, making decisions, and generating solutions”(Neck et al., 2019). For these reasons, I don’t think this type of leadership is the most effective as it hinders essential parts of organizational success and individual job satisfaction/motivation. Reference Lee, C., 2017. EMPLOYEE JOB SATISFACTION AND ENGAGEMENT: THE DOORS OF OPPORTUNITY ARE OPEN. Society for Human Resource Management. https://www.shrm.org/hr-today/trends-andforecasting/researchsurveys/Documents/2017-Employee-Job-Satisfaction-and-Engagement-Executive-Summary.pdf (Links to an external site.) Neck, C. P., Houghton, J. D., & Murray, E. L. (2019). Interactive: Organizational Behavior Interactive eBook (2nd Edition). SAGE Publications, Inc. (US). https://bookshelf.vitalsource.com/books/9781544364865 Example of reply (For this one you can write what you feel for this post) Samantha, I enjoyed reading your post. In my response, I somewhat agreed and disagreed with the fact that leaders majority of the time distance their decisions from the general population of employees. Being that I responded to both sides, I mainly agreed with this statement because with so many people depending on a businesses products and services, decisions become more tough and even more confidential, being a reason why lower standard employees are not involved in the decision-making process. Too many people involved in very legitimate conversations can lead to miscommunication and even more hardship with so many different opinions chiming in. While this concerns more successful businesses, it also can benefit smaller and newer ones on the market as well. After reading through the classes responses, not many agreed, therefore I am really expanding my knowledge regarding a situation like this by retaining the examples mentioned throughout the class with the disagreements. I liked how you mentioned, “By having responsibilities and control centralized at the top of the organizational hierarchy, many valid and essential information is being lost in the decision making process. Without having any say or being able to provide any type of feedback not only decreases the value of meaning one holds towards their job, but also the willingness they have to do it – both factors contributing to motivation.” This really emphasized the fact that motivation can be lost when information is kept private within certain individuals. While I felt keeping things more confidential would lead to less stress and unnecessary opinions, you believed it would lead to more stress if there aren’t any other opinions or insight. This was interesting to me, do you feel before information is spoken about, the individual should be analyzed? I say this because it can be difficult to trust individuals in the business world. I also see what you mean when you say willingness and motivation can be lost. If one individual is the “leader” and is responsible for a lot of important decision making factors, they can become stressed and overwhelmed with the pressure, leading to detrimental outcomes for the business. Do you feel that can be targeted towards the leader themself and if they are capable of being one? Great post overall, you really challenged my insight on this topic/situation! Discussion 2 Given our discussion of the sources of power in this section, watch the scene below and see if you can identify the different types of sources of power possessed by Andy and the lead guard.       From the very start, it was obvious the lead guard contained very intense leadership qualities. He had said, “What do you think the government is going to do to me?” Clearly, he is confident in the fact that he carries great responsibility and takes pride in his occupation. Due to him being so passionate, he feels nothing ever threatening can ever occur to him due to his authority level. The text states “Legitimate power: The degree to which a person has the right to ask others to do things that are considered within the scope of their authority” (Neck, Houghton, and Murray, 1965). This was demonstrated by the lead guard and the rest of the guards. They were standing there while Andy and his crew continued to do what they were told, they were even scared to stop working, not even for a second, or else they could possibly get killed for not obeying the guards orders properly.        In reference to reward power, “Reward power: The extent to which someone uses incentives to influence the actions of others” (Neck, Houghton, and Murray, 1965). This was shown in the video when Andy disobeyed his orders and the lead guard was about to push him off the roof. Suddenly, he took it upon himself to speak up, using his strong knowledge about the IRS and taxation he was able to stop the lead guard in his tracks and made him interested in what he was saying. Not only does this show that Andy had power in that moment seconds before his death, but he was also able to hold power over the lead guards general power, taking advantage of the fact that what he was saying was going to benefit the lead guard in the end and snap him out of pushing him to his death. Reward power not only succeeded for him individually, but he also made an incentive that would please his entire crew, which is exactly what he did as they were all enjoying their ice cold beers and he sat back and appreciated the moment.        Lastly, is coercive power, “Coercive power: A strategy by which a person controls the behavior of others through punishments, threats, or sanctions (Neck, Houghton, and Murray, 1965).  This was shown seconds into the scene. The lead guard and all the other guards were armed, simply because they had the power to do so, creating Andy and his workers to complete their tasks efficiently. Knowing that Andy and his crew could be shot for any mishap, it created them to work even harder. The guards just being armed shows that they were holding a threat against the crew.  Consider the idea that social intelligence can lead to power. Why might that be the case? – Social intelligence is when an individual holds a confidence in their knowledge, as well as being socially aware of their capabilities, strengths, and weaknesses. Not only does social intelligence revolve around that individual personally, but it also benefits who they come in contact with and their social skills in general. Social intelligence can lead to power because leadership qualities and power mainly stem from a person’s confidence and social knowledge. Being an individual who is proud in their capabilities allows loyal relationships to form and a sense of trust in decision making opportunities. Social intelligence not only allows one to grow as an individual and use their education and experiences wisely, but it also enhances independence and trust for others to depend on that person and their sense of direction they may not be socially aware of yet.  2. Under what circumstances and in what areas might coercive power still prove more effective? – As stated above and in the text, coercive power is a strategy by which a person controls the behavior of others through punishments, threats, or sanctions (Neck, Houghton, and Murray, 1965). I feel coercive power still proves to be more effective under very legitimate and legal circumstances. In a situation where one may be in danger or a life is at risk, this kind of power is effective due to the fact that someone’s safety is at stake. I do not believe it would be very effective in situations simply where it would just seem unnecessary. Not only does this create an atmosphere that is negative, but it also just promotes fear in people.  Neck, C. P., Houghton, J. D., & Murray, E. L. (1965). Organizational Behavior: A Skill-Building Approach (2nd ed.). Sage Publication Example of reply Hi Kayla, Great post! The point you made about coercive power being affective under legal circumstances was a great way to look at it. The threat of litigation and/or legal action is considered a large threat and could come with punishments like jail time or hefty fines. This type of coercive power can stop individuals from making unethical and unlawful decisions. In terms of organizations, the threat for stealing from the company can be enough to make even the most unethical employee second guess taking money from a register, or stealing time while on their shift. I agree with you that coercive power is often used improperly and cast negativity within departments or even spread in the organization. This can create a hostile and uncomfortable workplace because it wouldn’t provide a sense of security.  As legitimate power is defined as, “the degree to which a person has the right to ask others to do things that are considered in the scope of their authority.” (Neck et al., 2016). It is usually those who have said authority that exercise their power through coercion, much like the lead guard in the video. Do you think legitimate power and coercive power go hand in hand? Neck, C. P., Houghton, J. D., Murray, E. L., & Jazrawi, M. E. L. (2016). Organizational Behavior. SAGE Publications. In the scene, there were two clear sources of power used.  The first source of power used was coercive power.  Coercive power is the means by which a person controls the behavior of others through punishments, threats, or sanctions (Neck et al. pg. 376, 2020).  At the beginning of the scene, Andy from the convict crew was eavesdropping into the lead guard, Byron’s conversation about him receiving money from his deceased brother.  One of the guys in the convict crew said “Keep your eyes on your mop man, Andy.”  The guy was scared for Andy because he was looking in the direction of Byron.  He showed the fear that even a glance at Byron and his conversation could get them in trouble.  This shows that punishment is used towards the crew when they do anything else other than their job.  Not too long after, Andy approached Byron from behind, and his crew immediately lifted their rifles up to Andy’s face.  This shows that coercive power is used.  If Andy didn’t have an answer to Byron’s problem, he could’ve gotten seriously hurt or killed for just approaching him.  Then Andy negotiates with Byron and the reward power is used.  Reward power is the use of incentives to influence the actions of others (Neck et al. pg. 376, 2020).  Andy mentions that he can set up the taxes for him so he can save money instead of having to get a lawyer, but in return, he asks for three beers for each of his co-workers.  Byron rewarded the convict crew with beer because Andy helped him out.   Consider the idea that social intelligence can lead to power, Why might that be the case? Social intelligence can lead to power because you have to know when to use your power and how to use it correctly.  If you don’t know the people, you won’t be able to gain power over them.  You have to know them in order to be able to influence them into doing what you want them to do.  Power is the capacity to influence the actions of others (Neck et al. pg. 375, 2020).  Sometimes different sources of power will only work for certain people.  Not every type of power will work on everyone.  That is why it is important to know the people first before trying to control them.  In the article, “13 Things Socially Intelligent Leaders Do Different” by Briana Weist, Weist mentions that Socially Intelligent leaders won’t back people into corners (Weist 2018).  The leaders don’t need to give them an ultimatum because he or she understands the people and knows how they work and will listen to them.  The leader will give the other person a chance to express their feelings and offer them options for a solution that will give them a productive answer.  Aggression isn’t needed with socially intelligent leaders because they take the time to understand the other person.  Under what circumstances and in what areas might coercive power still prove more effective There are a few circumstances where coercive power is more effective.  In one scenario, if the employees do not listen or take a manager seriously, coercive power is needed.  Sometimes the only way people will listen to you is if they will get punished or threatened if they don’t complete a certain task.  The manager can simply say, “Complete this task, or I will write you up.”  In some cases, coercive power is more effective when you need something done a specific way and completed right away.  Sometimes if you tell an employee to get something done, they can “half-ass” it and/or take a while to complete it.  Using coercive power enforces the employee to get the job done right away and correctly.  If the manager knows a specific employee never listens or it takes the manager to tell the employee several times in order to get it done, coercive power is used.   Neck, C., Houghton, D., and Murray, E. (2020). Organizational Behavior: A Critical Thinking Approach. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications Example of reply Hi Lia, Great discussion post! We had similar points on how social intelligence can lead to power, I appreciated your elaboration on this point. If you understand the co-workers around you, and how the work well, you can emerge a leader in projects and ideas and that can turn into a position of power and authority like a managerial position. I think personal power can be correlated with social intelligence because of the interpersonal aspect of these attributes. Referent power is defined as, “the degree to which a leader can influence others through their desire to identify and be associated with them.” (Neck et al., 2016). This kind of power can come from a socially intelligent individual because of their understanding of what others need to feel secure in their leader. Would you agree that referent power could be strongly correlated to having social intelligence? Neck, C. P., Houghton, J. D., Murray, E. L., & Jazrawi, M. E. L. (2016). Organizational Behavior. SAGE Publications.  Reply