Blogging Questions for Sport Leadership (Chapter 1)
1) What are the strengths and weaknesses of the following leadership theories?
a) Trait > Since this leadership theory is still based largely on the "Great Man" theory (people are either born or are "made" with certain qualities that will make them great leaders) I think this is a weakness. It's solely based on the leader himself and not the situation. A strength is that it's one of the most researched theory of all of them.
b) Behavioral > The strength of this theory is that it's solely based on a person actions, how he/she can deal with situations. As a weakness I would mention that since it's based on a persons actions/behavior there's a chance that someone might "slip" through and not be a good leader because some of his/her behavior was falsely identified.
2) Do you believe that initiating structure and consideration are mutually exclusive properties? Explain why.
I think both initiating structure and consideration can go along with each other in the right environment. initiating structures are task & goal oriented whereas the consideration is more people-oriented and how a leader must interact with others etc. I believe the initiating structure is the more important of the two but consideration is required, too to be successful as a leader.
3) How does Fiedler’s contingency model complement trait and behavioral theories?
Fiedler's contingency model from 1967 states that the leader's leadership quality is based on the situation he or she is in. So I think that it really doesn't go along with the trait theory of specific traits/characteristics we're looking for. It goes much more / better along with behavioral theories, though.
4) How is the path-goal theory of leadership an extension of both the contingency model and the behavioral theory of leadership?
It is an extension in the way that the path-goal theory is based on the change of behavior of one leader in a given environment. At the same time Fiedler's contingency model is built around the situation in which a leader finds him/herself so the path-goal is an extension of this, too given the fact that people around/below a leader are the ones who create situations.
5) According to Soucie, how do leaders in sport management use different kinds of power?
Leaders in Sports Management use a variety of different powes: One, they give subordinates specific roles/goals and also have to motivate members of a group (Yukl, 1989). Also, using more personal vs. position power is very important. Having a good loyal network, friendships is often a better way of power than just authority, punishments or awards as he outlines (Podsakoff & Schriesheim, 1985). Political power is important, too as it gives them the opportunity to gain influence within a structure, system or organization (Pfeffer, 1981).
6) In your opinion, which is more effective, transactional leadership or transformational leadership? Explain why.
I believe that transformational leadership is more effective. Transactional is more just taking car eof you have and dealing with it whereas transformational goes a step further and trying to imporve things and make a change for the better. As an example, a President like Obama would always want to chose transformational leadership style since he has to look forward and improve things rather than "just doing what's necessary".
Yes, trait theory is very individualistic. It is based on the person and not the situation or the appropriate behavior. Yes, the great man theory precedes this particular iteration of the trait theory. More important, the trait theory does not allow for nuance, and it basically suggests that certain people will not be able to act as great leaders because of the traits that they lack. This is very myopic to say the least.
ReplyDeleteSimilar to the trait theory, the behavioral theory is very individualistic. It does not allow for nuance or variety. This theory also reduces great leadership to individual behavior and not the particular situation, which is one of the benefits of the contingency model.
You bring up an interesting point about initiating structure and consideration being able to co-exist. In your words, what is the "right environment"? You could have unpacked that a little more. Have you ever been in a situation that could be considered the "right environment"? Please insert your voice next time. Why do you think initiating structure is the most important?
The contingency model is an extension of the trait and behavioral theories of old. In fact, it is considered one of the newer theories in the leadership. People who trumpet this theory believe that certain situations require the right trait; for instance, someone taking initiative to rectify a situation. In other cases, the right behavior is needed in certain situations. So in this case, it is an extension of these old theories because certain situations require the right trait and other situations require the right behavior.
I think you really could have deconstructed or unpacked question # 4. It would have been helpful to explain what exactly is the path-goal theory. The people around leaders do play a role in creating situations, but they don't assume the lion's share of the responsibility of creating the situation in question. You must also consider their previous encounters with the leaders because those past experiences color the new situations.
Yes, you are correct in your assertion about power exercised in sport management. What about expert power? Referent power? You could have inserted your voice in this section because I am sure you may have been in situations where you exercised your expert skills.
Many people do believe that transformational leadership is more effective. People are motivated to transcend their self-interests for the good of the organization. This is not the case with transactional leadership, which caters to the selfishness within humans. You can argue that transformational leadership is exploitative because you are only motivating people to do better just so that the company or organization does well. And if the follower is transformed throughout the process, then so be it. I think politicians use transactional leadership more than we think. Consider all the instances where they have to buy votes to get legislation to pass the U.S. Senate.