LP762-L2 week 8

KarenS

LP762Notes8.pptx

Home >Psychology homework help >LP762-L2 week 8

WJC LP 762: The Psychology of Leadership and Followership Dr. Dan Jacobs William James College

Notes 8

Relational Dynamics and Leadership

Different views of Authentic Leadership (AL)

Gender and leadership

Organic development

Natural affinities

Relationship with followers

Team building

Trust and support

Different cultural views of leadership (7GT)

Authentic Leaders (Yagil & Medler-Liraz, 2014)

“Authentic leaders represent principles of honesty and transparency, which become more valuable as the complexity of the business world increases.

They are characterized by self- awareness and openness to self-relevant information, behave according to their values, and strive for honesty in their interpersonal relationships.”

Leader-Follower Authenticity (Yagil & Medler-Liraz, 2014)

“We suggest that the impact of authentic leaders on employees’ authenticity should be framed with regard to organizational pressures toward impression management.

In this research, we explore the notion that authentic leaders indirectly promote employee authenticity by generating a sense of ease regarding genuine self-expression, thereby providing an environment in which followers can create their own meaning.”

Leader-Follower Authenticity (Yagil & Medler-Liraz, 2014)

“Authentic leaders may indirectly enhance employees’ authenticity by mitigating both internal and external effects on impression management in organizational contexts.

Practically speaking, followers’ authenticity can be expected to influence the quality of leader–follower and employee–customer relationships, and to enhance employee well-being.”

Authentic Leadership Definition (Yagil & Medler-Liraz, 2014)

“Walumbwa, Avolio, Gardner, Wernsing, and Peterson (2008) define authentic leadership as a pattern of leader behavior that draws upon and promotes both positive psychological capabilities and a positive ethical climate, to foster greater self awareness, an internalized moral perspective, balanced processing of information, and relational transparency on the part of leaders working with followers, fostering positive self-development. (p. 94)”

Authentic Leadership Definition (Yagil & Medler-Liraz, 2014)

“Authentic leadership thus comprises several interrelated dimensions:

self-awareness,

balanced processing authentic behavior, and

authentic relational orientation.”

Self-Awareness (Yagil & Medler-Liraz, 2014)

“Self-awareness refers to the leader’s awareness of and trust in his or her own personal characteristics, values, motives, feelings, and cognition. Highly authentic leaders understand their own strengths, weaknesses, and motives, as well as recognize how others view their leadership.”

Balanced Processing (Yagil & Medler-Liraz, 2014)

“Balanced processing involves objectivity and acceptance of one’s positive and negative attributes and qualities, and is associated with selecting self-relevant information that has important implications for leaders’ decision making.”

Authentic Behavior (Yagil & Medler-Liraz, 2014)

“Authentic behavior refers to whether leaders act in accord with their true values and preferences. Authentic relational orientation involves striving for openness and truthfulness in relationships.

Gardner et al. (2005) maintained that authentic leadership extends beyond the authenticity of the leader to include authentic relations with followers, characterized by transparency, openness, and trust, guidance toward worthy objectives, and emphasis on follower development.”

Authenticity and Impression Management (Yagil & Medler-Liraz, 2014)

“The literature on leader–follower relationships in the workplace suggests that followers’ behavior toward leaders is often inauthentic and reflects strategies of impression management, described as the process through which individuals seek to influence the image others have of them …”

Authenticity and Impression Management (Yagil & Medler-Liraz, 2014)

“A major strategy of impression management is ingratiation… Other-focused strategies focus on

making the target feel good…

by showing attraction to the target,

flattering the target,

doing favors for, or

agreeing with the target…”

Self-Presentation (Yagil & Medler-Liraz, 2014)

“With self-presentation, the individual attempts to create an image of himself or herself that will be perceived favorably by a target individual...

Self-presentation strategies may involve attempts to either look good or avoid looking bad…”

Q: How does this relate to “being authentic”?

Benefits of Authentic Leadership (Yagil & Medler-Liraz, 2014)

“Authentic leadership provides employees with an environment that allows authentic self-expression by demonstrating that being ”natural” is acceptable.

Because followers strive to make a good impression, they may only express themselves in a way they feel is acceptable to the leader, or conceal mistakes and attributes that may be viewed as undesirable…

Benefits of Authentic Leadership (Yagil & Medler-Liraz, 2014)

By deviating from norms of emotional expression, leaders become more accessible and thus reduce followers’ apprehension regarding the consequences of genuine self-presentation, as well as signal to followers that they too can deviate from such norms.”

“Emotions which deviate from “proper leadership” may actually enhance leader–follower interactions.”

Benefits of Authentic Leadership (Yagil & Medler-Liraz, 2014)

“Authentic leadership may play an important role in service contexts in which authentic self- expression is inhibited by organizational rules.”

“Employee inauthenticity is associated with burnout and self-alienation.”

“By enhancing the authenticity of service encounters, leaders may mitigate the negative outcomes of compliance with display rules, both on employees’ well-being…and on customers’ evaluation of service quality.”

Q: How does knowing this information help us?

What Messages Have We Been Given?

What is Authentic Leadership? (Gardner, et al., 2011)

Authentic Leadership (AL) is a relatively newly developed construct (in terms of use in leadership research and literature), created in part as a response to concerns about “the ethical conduct of today’s leaders based on chilling examples of corporate and government malfeasance” and calls for a “new type of genuine and values-based leadership.”

Authentic Leadership: Explanation of AL (Gardner, et al., 2011)

What is “AL”?

“Unfortunately…the emergence of multiple practitioner and scholarly conceptions of AL has created ambiguity about what does and does not constitute AL, as well as the efficacy of strategies for its development. These problems are compounded by a limited amount of empirical research, which makes it difficult to assess the validity of assertions regarding the positive effects of AL that are commonly advanced by its proponents…”

However, there have been some efforts to clarify AL:

Different Definitions of Authentic Leadership (Rome & Rome, 1967, p. 185 cited in Gardner, et al., 2011)

“A hierarchical organization, in short, like an individual person, is ‘authentic’ to the extent that, throughout its leadership,

it accepts finitude, uncertainty, and contingency;

realizes its capacity for responsibility and choice;

acknowledges guilt and errors;

fulfills its creative managerial potential for flexible planning, growth, and charter or policy formation; and

responsibly participates in the wider community.”

Different Definitions of Authentic Leadership (Henderson & Hoy, 1983, p. 67-68 cited in Gardner, et al., 2011)

“Leadership authenticity is therefore defined as the extent to which subordinates perceive their leader to

demonstrate the acceptance of organizational and personal responsibility for actions, outcomes, and mistakes;

to be non-manipulating of subordinates; and to exhibit salience of self over role.

Leadership inauthenticity is defined as the extent to which subordinates perceive their leader

to be ‘passing the buck’ and blaming others and circumstances for errors and outcomes;

to be manipulative of subordinates; and to be demonstrating a salience of role over self.”

Different Definitions of Authentic Leadership (Bhindi & Duignan, 1997, p.119 cited in Gardner, et al., 2011)

In this article the authors argue for authentic leadership based on:

authenticity, which entails the discovery of the authentic self through meaningful relationships within organizational structures and processes that support core, significant values;

intentionality, which implies visionary leadership that takes its energy and direction from the good intentions of current organizational members who put their intellects, hearts and souls into shaping a vision for the future;

a renewed commitment to spirituality, which calls for the rediscovery of the spirit within each person and celebration of the shared meaning, with purpose of relationship;

a sensibility to the feelings, aspirations and needs of others, with special reference to the multicultural settings in which many leaders operate in the light of the increasing globalizing trends in life and work.”

Different Definitions of Authentic Leadership (Begley, 2001, p. 353 cited in Gardner, et al., 2011)

“Authentic leadership may be thought of as a metaphor for professionally effective, ethically sound, and consciously reflective practices in educational administration.

This is leadership that is knowledge based, values informed, and skillfully executed.”

Different Definitions of Authentic Leadership (George, 2003, p. 12 cited in Gardner, et al., 2011)

“Authentic leaders use their natural abilities, but they also recognize their shortcomings, and work hard to overcome them.

They lead with purpose, meaning, and values.

They build enduring relationships with people.

Others follow them because they know where they stand.

They are consistent and self-disciplined.

When their principles are tested, they refuse to compromise.

Authentic leaders are dedicated to developing themselves because they know that becoming a leader takes a lifetime of personal growth.”

Different Definitions of Authentic Leadership (Luthans & Avolio, 2003, p. 243 cited in Gardner, et al., 2011)

“The authentic leader is confident, hopeful, optimistic, resilient, transparent, moral/ethical future-oriented, and gives priority to developing associates into leaders themselves.

The authentic leader does not try to coerce or even rationally persuade associates, but rather the leader's authentic values, beliefs, and behaviors serve to model the development of associates.”

Different Definitions of Authentic Leadership (Avolio, Luthans et al., 2004, p.4 cited in Gardner, et al., 2011)

“Authentic leaders are

“those individuals who know who they are, what they think and behave and

are perceived by others as being aware of their own and others' values/moral perspective, knowledge, and strengths;

aware of the context in which they operate; and

who are confident, hopeful, resilient, and of high moral character.”

Different Definitions of Authentic Leadership (Ilies, et al., 2005, p. 374 cited in Gardner, et al., 2011)

“Authentic leaders are

deeply aware of their values and beliefs,

they are self-confident, genuine, reliable and trustworthy, and

they focus on building followers' strengths, broadening their thinking and

creating a positive and engaging organizational context.”

Different Definitions of Authentic Leadership (Shamir & Eilam, 2005, p. 399 cited in Gardner, et al., 2011)

“[O]ur definition of authentic leaders implies that authentic leaders can be distinguished from less authentic or inauthentic leaders by four self-related characteristics:

1) the degree of person role merger i.e. the salience of the leadership role in their self-concept,

2) the level of self-concept clarity and the extent to which this clarity centers around strongly held values and convictions,

3) the extent to which their goals are self-concordant, and

4) the degree to which their behavior is consistent with their self-concept.”

Different Definitions of Authentic Leadership (George & Sims, 2007, p. xxxi cited in Gardner, et al., 2011)

“Authentic leaders are “genuine people who are true to themselves and to what they believe in.

They engender trust and develop genuine connections with others. Because people trust them, they are able to motivate others to high levels of performance.

Rather than letting the expectations of other people guide them, they are prepared to be their own person and go their own way.

As they develop as authentic leaders, they are more concerned about serving others than they are about their own success or recognition.”

Different Definitions of Authentic Leadership (Walumbwa, et al., 2008, p. 94 cited in Gardner, et al., 2011)

“[W]e define authentic leadership as a pattern of leader behavior that draws upon and promotes both positive psychological capacities and a positive ethical climate, to foster greater self-awareness, an internalized moral perspective, balanced processing of information, and relational transparency on the part of leaders working with followers, fostering positive self-development.”

Different Definitions of Authentic Leadership (Whitehead, 2008, p. 850 cited in Gardner, et al., 2011)

“In this article, a definition of an authentic leader is adopted as one who:

(1) is self-aware, humble, always seeking improvement, aware of those being led and looks out for the welfare of others;

(2) fosters high degrees of trust by building an ethical and moral framework; and

(3) is committed to organizational success within the construct of social values.”

Authentic Leadership: Authenticity (Gardner, et al., 2011)

Early view of the four key components of authenticity included:

“(1) awareness (i.e., knowledge and trust in one's thoughts, feelings, motives and values);

(2) unbiased processing (i.e., objectivity about and acceptance of one's positive and negative attributes);

(3) behavior (i.e., acting based on one's true preferences, values, and needs rather than merely acting to please others, secure rewards, or avoid punishments); and

(4) relational orientation (i.e., achieving and valuing truthfulness and openness in one's close relationships; Kernis, 2003; Kernis & Goldman, 2006).”

Meta-Analysis of Authentic Leadership Articles (Gardner, et al., 2011)

All articles from 1983 to 2010 on authentic leadership included in the study were subsequently divided into three “primary types” including:

1. Theoretical

2. Empirical

3. Practitioner

*Theoretical originally had the most representation in the literature but empirical has increased in recent years (practitioner is still the least represented group when examining this construct in the literature).

Meta-Analysis of Authentic Leadership Articles (Gardner, et al., 2011)

Authors of the AL articles:

“…most authors have academic affiliations (196; 96.6%), identify with the management (132; 65%), business in general (18; 8.9%), or education (17; 8.4%) disciplines, and reside in the United States (152; 74.8%) or Canada (16; 7.9%). The overrepresentation of academic authors is not surprising given our decision to focus on scholarly work in the area. However, the high proportion of North American scholars with management, business, or educational training raises some concerns, particularly given that the construct of authenticity has deep roots in other disciplines (e.g., philosophy, art, psychology, sociology) and European and Asian cultures…”

Meta-Analysis of AL (Theoretical Foundations) (Gardner, et al., 2011)

“As part of our content analysis, each coder recorded the primary theoretical foundations they viewed as underlying the discussion of AL through an open-ended, qualitative coding process (Lee, 1999). The theories identified were subsequently grouped into nine categories through a data reduction process. These categories are:

(1) AL theory;

(2) authenticity/self/identity;

(3) affective processes;

(4) attribution theory/social perception;

(5) ethics/values/ethical leadership;

(6) neo-charismatic leadership theories;

(7) positive psychology/positive organizational behavior (POB)/positive organizational scholarship (POS);

(8) well-being/vital engagement, and

(9) other/not applicable…”

A Need to Study Authentic Followership (Gardner et al., 2011)

“From the outset, practitioner and scholarly authors have emphasized the importance of authentic followership…as a central component of the AL process…We suspect that the authenticity of followers may be as important to the development of authentic leadership as the authenticity of the leader. Nevertheless, none of the empirical studies reviewed focused explicitly on authentic followership. Hence, as Avolio and Reichard (2008) emphasize, empirical investigations of the role that followers play in the formation of authentic relationships is critical…”

Q: Implications for leadership consultants?

Authentic Conversation or Cluelessness?

How Does Someone View Connection?

Additional Thoughts Regarding AL

Q: Why are there not more empirical studies of authentic leadership?

Q: Why are there not any studies of authentic followership?

Q: How does the academic-heavy and North American-heavy nature of the majority of the studies in Gardner, et al. (2011) impact the applicability of the concepts raised?

Can a Leader “Just Become” Authentic?

How does this information about authentic leadership connect with the Collins’ information above connected with the Hedgehog Concept?

If we are consulting with a leader who had a very “buttoned-down” and formal style, can she easily make the transition to adopt some of these authentic traits?

How does the concept of innovation fit in with these questions?

Innovation and Leadership (Bennis, 2009)

“Leaders are, by definition, innovators. They do things other people have not done or dare not do. They do things in advance of other people. They make new things. They make old things new. Having learned from the past, they live in the present, with one eye on the future. And each leader puts it all together in a different way.”

Leadership and Change (Bennis, 2009)

“Learning to lead is, on one level, learning to manage change. As we’ve seen, a leader imposes (in the most positive sense of the word) his or her philosophy on the organization, creating or re-creating its culture.

The organization then acts on that philosophy, carries out the mission, and the culture takes on a life of its own, becoming more cause than effect. But unless the leader continues to evolve, to adapt and to adjust to external change, the organization will sooner or later stall.”

Learning Leadership on the Job (Bennis, 2009)

“Leaders learn by leading, and they learn best by leading in the face of obstacles. As weather shapes mountains, so problems make leaders. Difficult bosses, lack of vision and virtue in the executive suite, circumstances beyond their control, and their own mistakes have been the leaders’ basic curriculum.”

Q: Limitations with this model?

What Are The Team Goals?

Applications of Theory to Team Building

Over the next few weeks we will continue to consider the ways we can actually implement the theoretical concepts we are evaluating into real-world scenarios.

The topic of authenticity points out how a leaders actions and style can have such a freeing (or restricting) impact on followers as individuals.

This is true regarding group or team behaviors as well and the next few slides just begin to raise the consideration of the purposes and goals of team building (and relevant interventions):

Goals of Authentic Team Building

Allowing team members to establish a sense of partnership.

Allowing team members to take risks involving conflict, trust, and hard work.

Helping members to see the team as a unit.

Helping members see the team as a positive work arrangement.

-Harrington-Mackin (1994); Luthans (2010); Yagil & Medler-Liraz (2014)

Goals of Authentic Team Building

Allowing team members opportunities to explore creative and innovative solutions to problems.

Helping team members take strides towards fostering interdependence with other team members.

Helping members develop methods of sharing “collective intelligence.”

Helping members experience a sense of empowerment in their work efforts.

-Harrington-Mackin (1994); Luthans (2010); Yagil & Medler-Liraz (2014)

Goals of Authentic Team Building

Helping foster rapid learning for team members.

Helping in the development of an open and free-flowing generation of ideas between members.

Allowing team members to develop and learn team rules that allow the team to govern itself.

Helping team members learn to identify and follow through on tasks that match team rules and goals.

Fostering an environment supportive of “authentic” communication.

-Harrington-Mackin (1994); Luthans (2010); Yagil & Medler-Liraz (2014)

What Does It Take To Lead the Team?

Leaders, Followers & Attachment Theory (Hinojosa, et al., 2014)

“Attachment theory asserts that individuals form an attachment style—secure, insecure-ambivalent, or insecure-avoidant— toward primary caregivers early in life, and this attachment style becomes an internal working model (i.e., a schema/script) for interactions in future relationships (Ainsworth et al., 1971; Bowlby, 1969, 1988).

Leaders, Followers & Attachment Theory (Hinojosa, et al., 2014)

“The central premise of attachment theory is that caregivers who encourage children to develop a healthy independence will enable them to form secure attachment styles that will, in turn, facilitate the future development of healthy adult relationships in their private and professional lives (Bowlby, 1988).

In contrast, children who are unable to form secure relationships with caregivers may find it difficult to develop secure personal and work relationships as adults (Bowlby, 1979).”

Leaders, Followers & Attachment Theory (Hinojosa, et al., 2014)

“While the foundational attachment research focused on infants and their relationships with caregivers, later research has explored its implications for adults…romantic relationships…, supervisor–subordinate relationships..., co-workers…and leaders...

Recent research suggests that while initial attachment styles can have a great impact on attachment in future relationships, relationship-specific attachment styles can also develop (Fraley, 2007). According to Fraley's (2007) work on the connectionist model of attachment, the attachment style enacted in a relationship is determined by the relative salience of the various attachment models a person has formed in other relationships…”

Leaders, Followers & Attachment Theory (Hinojosa, et al., 2014)

“For example, in a relationship with a co-worker, the person's relationships with other co-workers are more likely to be salient than their relationships with parents.

Thus, the attachment style one developed early in life with a parent may exert less influence in this situation than the attachment style with co-workers…”

Leaders, Followers & Attachment Theory (Hinojosa, et al., 2014)

“Nevertheless, both of these relationship-specific styles may play a role in determining the attachment style enacted in this particular work relationship.

In other words, although the child's attachment to a parent sets an important path for the development of an attachment working model, this model is not deterministic and is therefore open to change across and within different relationships (Fraley, 2007; La Guardia, Ryan, Couchman, & Deci, 2000)…”

Attachment Theory (Hinojosa, et al., 2014)

“John Bowlby (1969, 1979, 1988) argued that human behavior can only be understood by considering the basic environment within which that behavior evolved. He theorized that the attachment patterns infants developed with their primary caregiver would influence interpersonal experiences into adulthood.

Based on detailed observations of the interactions between mothers and their young children at home and in lab settings, Mary Ainsworth and associates (1971) extended Bowlby's theory by identifying three patterns of attachment:

secure,

insecure-avoidant (avoidant), and

insecure-ambivalent (ambivalent).

Securely attached infants tended to have mothers who were responsive to their child's cries and other cues. Avoidant infants were more likely to have mothers that were insensitive to their child's cues, and ambivalent infants typically had mothers that were inconsistent in their responsiveness to their child (Ainsworth et al., 1971)…”

Attachment Theory (Hinojosa, et al., 2014)

“Research on adult attachment patterns supports Bowlby's and Ainsworth's assertions.

In particular, securely attached adults are more likely to be open to others, believe others are trustworthy, and seek balance between closeness and autonomy (Mikulincer & Shaver, 2007).

Avoidant adults are more likely to be suspicious of human motives, believe others are not trustworthy, and avoid closeness (Ainsworth, Blehar, Waters, & Wall, 1978; Mikulincer, 1998b).

Finally, ambivalent adults are more likely to be overly reliant on others, fear that they will be let down, and sabotage others' attempts at becoming close (Mikulincer & Shaver, 2007).

Attachment Theory (Hinojosa, et al., 2014)

“Thus, while people with either insecure attachment style are likely to have difficulty trusting others, the two styles differ with regard to the behavioral strategies used to cope with insecurity in close relationships;

in essence, avoidant adults deal with relationship insecurity by distancing themselves from others, while ambivalent adults deal with relationship insecurity by clinging to close others.”

Connection to Leadership Theory (Hinojosa, et al., 2014)

“While early experiences may still influence relationships in adulthood, recent and salient attachment experiences are much more likely to influence the attachment working model enacted in a given interaction.

Thus, in a leader–follower relationship, past relationships with other leaders or followers are likely to be more salient to a person's attachment style than the relationship with one's parents…”

Connection to Leadership Theory (Hinojosa, et al., 2014)

Indeed, the leader–follower relationship is a key attachment relationship since leaders serve as attachment figures for followers by providing security, comfort, and support to followers during times of need (Game, 2011).

However, the power differential associated with the leader and follower roles creates a unique attachment relationship. This power differential is a distinguishing feature that is absent in many adult attachment relationships…”

Connection to Leadership Theory (Hinojosa, et al., 2014)

“Although the asymmetry of power may decrease the ability of the follower to upwardly influence the leader, the leader's power may also permit the leader to provide a safe haven for the follower during stressful situations.

Such consideration by the leader promotes the development of follower self-reliance (i.e., the ability to navigate confidently and independently in the social world), which is only achieved when the follower feels supported and protected by close others (Game, 2011)…”

Connection to Leadership Theory (Hinojosa, et al., 2014)

“Empirical work examining the implications of attachment theory within the leader–follower relationship has demonstrated that secure attachment is associated with transformational leadership behaviors (Popper et al., 2000).

In addition, secure attachment is associated with greater amounts of leadership experience (defined as the extent of responsibility and influence one has held), by way of higher levels of openness to experience and decreased trait anxiety (Popper & Amit, 2009).

Research also suggests that secure leaders tend to be socialized charismatic leaders who seek positive outcomes on behalf of the collective they represent, while avoidant leaders are more likely to be personalized charismatic leaders who are motivated by self-serving objectives (Popper, 2002)…”

Findings and Discussion (Hinojosa, et al., 2014)

“As leaders and followers in organizations strive to foster authentic relationships with one another, it is important to recognize that they do not come to the relationship as a blank slate. To the contrary, they have a developmental history that impacts their capacity for authenticity.

Attachment theory provides a useful lens for understanding the extent to which leaders and followers are capable of developing authentic relationships.

Our review suggests that individuals with secure versus insecure attachment styles may be more likely to establish authentic relationships, and thus extremely insecure attachment styles may constitute a boundary condition under which AL is unlikely to flourish and/or be effective.”

Findings and Discussion (Hinojosa, et al., 2014)

“At the team level, the attachment style of the unit leader may serve as a contextual variable that impacts authentic follower performance and development. Hannah and colleagues (2011) found that team leader authenticity was positively related to team authenticity, which in turn positively impacted team productivity and teamwork behaviors.

Walumbwa and colleagues (2011) showed that AL served to enhance the collective psychological capital of work teams and team trust, which in turn led to elevated levels of group performance and organizational citizenship behaviors. Leroy et al. (in press) found that AL at the unit level provided a supportive context that enabled followers to better satisfy their basic psychological needs, which in turn facilitated elevated levels of work role performance…”

Findings and Discussion (Hinojosa, et al., 2014)

“Finally, using a sample of military cadets, Harms, Spain, and Hannah (2011) demonstrated that subclinical traits impacted leader development, with “dark side” traits influencing the developmental trajectory of leaders.

If followers find themselves in units led by persons who possess such “dark side” traits, opportunities for trust and authentic relationships may be limited…”

Findings and Discussion (Hinojosa, et al., 2014)

“Together, these findings suggest that AL and team authenticity can serve to establish a context that may be more or less conducive to follower authenticity and the associated outcomes, suggesting that team leadership and authenticity are important boundary conditions for member authenticity…”

Q: Implications for leadership consultants?

Findings and Discussion (Hinojosa, et al., 2014)

“The introduction of attachment theory to the AL literature also paves the way for further empirical studies. For example, Avolio, Hannah, and colleagues (Avolio & Hannah, 2008; Hannah & Avolio, 2010; Hannah & Lester, 2009) introduced the construct of developmental readiness and suggested that persons at the highest levels of readiness are more receptive and capable of leader development…”

Findings and Discussion (Hinojosa, et al., 2014)

“It is possible that building secure attachment styles could help individuals move to higher levels of developmental readiness and, conversely, insecure styles may hinder such movement.

Given that both developmental readiness and attachment working models are initiated at birth and evolve through the lifespan, future integration of theory and research in this area could be fruitful in advancing the study and practice of AL development…”

How Does Someone View Questions?

Diversity Issues

As we have recently begun to talk about, when considering psychological factors, it is often quite useful for a leader to be aware of different factors that help contribute to the development of followers prior to being a part of the organization (for different reasons).

Examples of diversity can be found in religion, nationality, language and culture, and are all areas we have considered before to some degree.

Cultural Factors

Why are we interested in considering cultural factors (from a leadership consulting perspective)?

How important is the individual leader’s (or follower’s) cultural factors as compared to the culture of the company or system?

Cultural Factors in Consulting

Why have we been hired? (What is the primary goal of the consultation?)

Do cultural factors always weigh in when addressing systemic change interventions? (When would they be more or less relevant?)

Strength in Diversity (?)

There are a wide range of views on the values of having a system made up of those with different background (bringing different ideas and sources of creativity with them) or those with similar backgrounds (perhaps understanding the system’s “way of doing things” faster); OUR job is to help those we consult with have the right data available to make decisions about change and effective interventions.

Our job is not about dogma—this is often the enemy of creativity. We can benefit in our task by understanding the stories and narratives of others.

The Seven Grandfather Teachings (Verbos & Humphries, 2014)

“The Seven Grandfather Teachings” is “an ancient sacred story” of the Native American Potawatomi and Ojibwe peoples.

This story is also considered a cultural “relational ethic” and is used in different ways to teach students about values, leadership, teamwork and other dynamics.

These teachings are also used in recovery work, trauma support work, and in other clinical areas.

The Seven Grandfather Teachings (Verbos & Humphries, 2014)

The 7 Teachings “state that human beings are responsible to act with” the following towards “each other and all creation”:

1. Wisdom

2. Respect

3. Love

4. Honesty

5. Humility

6. Bravery

7. Truth

The Seven Grandfather Teachings (Verbos & Humphries, 2014)

“Recognition is growing that the prevailing systems of capitalist development and their related instrumental values are exacerbating rather than reducing social inequality and environmental degradation (Kockel 2012; Maxton 2011; Stiglitz 2012).

The nigh elimination of ethical systems based on relational values from prevailing commercialism is coming under increasing review…”

The Seven Grandfather Teachings (Verbos & Humphries, 2014)

“By relational values we mean a way of being, knowing, understanding, feeling, and acting in relationship to other humans, plants, animals, and the natural world, as interrelated and spirit-filled (cf. Cajete 2000; Nelson 2008).

In Native American cultures, this keen sense of interconnectedness holds Earth to be a living organism, Mother of all things (Moore et al. 2007)…”

Value of Native American Teachings (Verbos & Humphries, 2014)

“The metaphysical, spiritual component effectuates mutuality thorough deep gratitude expressed in traditional ceremonies. These are values that have sustained communities even in the face of significant challenge and oppression since contact with Europeans (cf. Simpson 2004).

Ausubel (2008) suggests that indigenous wisdom is ‘‘precisely what humanity most needs now to slip through this epochal keyhole of history where the stakes are the very survival of our species and countless other beings in the web of life’’ (p. xxi)…”

Value of Native American Teachings (Verbos & Humphries, 2014)

“The Seven Grandfather Teachings come from a traditional Potawatomi and Ojibwe story that is a part of their oral educational tradition. The Seven Grandfather Teachings have an ancient origin and are not attributable to any particular author or translator from original Algonquin languages.

We gratefully acknowledge the multitude of elders who passed this story on, and each person who has given it to someone else. The story conveys what it means to live a good life; i.e., how human beings should behave toward one another, the Earth, and all of nature…”

Impact of Storytelling (Verbos & Humphries, 2014)

“The story is a sacred truth passed down through millennia. It is a moral frame that sustains people, yet may have proved problematic when dealing with over 40 treaties made and kept by Potawatomi consistent with their values, but broken by white governments.

Native American storytelling differs from Western storytelling in form as well as function (Verbos et al. 2011b). Storytelling in this context enables individual and community life and the life and process of the natural world to become the primary vehicles for the transmission of culture…”

Power of Storytelling (Verbos & Humphries, 2014)

“The Seven Grandfather Teachings are instructions about the foundational values that make up our relationships with each other and the natural world.

Each teaching contains a value that was given as a gift from spiritual beings (the Seven Grandfathers) to the first elder when he was a boy. Thus it reaches back to the very beginning of a society that relies upon elders to pass down wisdom. It is an original instruction about our responsibilities as humans…”

Q: Relevance to leadership consultants?

The Seven Values of the Grandfather Teachings (Verbos & Humphries, 2014)

“The seven values presented in the story are translated from Potawatomi as wisdom, love, respect, bravery, honesty, humility, and truth. These values are universally recognized as virtues or character strengths (see Peterson and Seligman 2004). Their interpretation in Potawatomi culture is that:

(1) the values in Potawatomi culture are human responsibilities that apply to all situations;

(2) all of the teachings are construed together as interdependent; and

(3) the teachings do not privilege human beings over other aspects of creation.

The values are transcendent as defined by Peterson and Selgiman (2004) because they connect an individual to something higher in meaning or purpose…”

The Seven Values (Verbos & Humphries, 2014)

“It is said by those who live these teachings that if you do not practice a teaching, you are enacting its opposite…”

Q: Could we develop a hiring screening that was primarily based on the Seven Values?

Q: How would you measure them?

Q: What would we need to do to consider the issue of fit once we gathered our information?