Leadership Evaluation and Leadership Philosophy

Conscious Leadership

According to Mackey and Sisodia (2013), conscious leadership is a more modern type of leadership, which is a bit different from the approach and theories of leadership from the past. According to the conscious form, a business leader is not only concerned about the welfare of financial success in an organization but also seeks to provide social, cultural, emotional and spiritual needs to the stakeholders of the particular business. Eventually, it is viewed as an approach that responds to the current needs of the society in addition to ensuring that the stakeholders make the profits that lured them into the business. This type of leadership is strikingly different from other theories in the contemporary society.

The transactional theory of leadership states that a leader should identify the needs of his or her followers and seek to meet those needs. As such, there is often limited attention paid to the external society which is affected by the business in question which is different from the conscious leadership theory. On the other hand, the transformational theory of leadership has the argument based on the leader’s ability to identify a particular issue in need of change and steer the organization towards the achievement of the change objective (Gregory, Russell, & Patterson, 2004). Therefore, there is also so much attention paid to the organization in this theory that the leaders ignore the needs of the external environment of the business in question. As such, consciousness towards the external world is one of the most striking difference between conscious leadership and other forms of leadership theories.

Self-Awareness, Self-Concept, and Emotional Intelligence

Self-awareness is one of the critical factors in effective conscious leadership. It provides a leader with a dependable personal profile of his or her strengths and weaknesses. Self-concept and Emotional intelligence also provide information about a particular leader, giving him or her the opportunity to maximize on the personal strengths and work on the weaknesses, for effectiveness in meeting the mandate of the leadership position. Notably, conscious leadership involves more than simply meeting the goals of the organization and surpassing them. To create emotional stability within a workplace, a leader should be effective in interacting with the members of staff and providing sufficient support and motivation where necessary.

A leader could be good at directing and delegating responsibilities to different members of staff and his or her oversight of the activities would lead to achievement of the goals. However, it could also be the case that the said leader has a poor personality and does not make any compromises making his word the law in the workplace. Therefore, the employees would be dissatisfied with the leader, but content at the rewards of staying at the company. As such, the leader does not impact emotional wealth which makes him less effective in emotional leadership. Self-assessments make it possible for a leader to identify such weaknesses early enough and make the necessary adjustments, thereby improving effectiveness as a conscious leader (Diddams & Chang, 2012).

Test Results

According to the personal assessment, I had a score of 42 on the emotional intelligence scale. Being less than half of the expected score it is an indicator that there is significant room for improvement as there are some emotions with which I struggle to identify. An improvement would imply better performance in relation with colleagues irrespective of personal experiences prior to the interaction in question.

On the personality assessment, I had a score of 67, which classifies me as part of the sixth decile in relation to roughness and mildness. The score indicates that belong to the mildness category of individuals, with whom it is often easy to negotiate. Conversely, a score below 50, in the roughness group would indicate that I am often non-compliant, and hard to negotiate with. According to the score, it would be hard for me to be part of a conflict due to my higher chances of resignation rather than confrontation.

In the learning styles category, I scored 13 on visuals, 10 on aural, 14 on reading and writing, and 14 on kinesthetic. Clearly, my primary strengths in learning lie within effectiveness in reading and writing, and also learning things with some form of practicality in them.

The value profile placed traditional, social, and political values as my most important ones. This implies that I am most likely to make decisions based on tradition in the workplace than I would base on religion. As such, I would be of value in ensuring that organizational culture is maintained in a particular organization. This was confirmed by the values test in which defined the terminal and industrial values, and their implications on my leadership approach.

The final test involved cultural competence. According to the test, involvement in the community marked one of the most notable areas in need of improvement. Further, involvement with employees at the workplace would also be an important factor in helping improve my understanding of their culture.

Implications of the Assessment

An effective leader needs to be conscious enough of his weaknesses and work towards their improvement (Goleman & Boyatzis, 2008). The assessment herein made it clear that I need to be more open to exploring more outside my normal routines. Such exploration could include greater interaction with members of different cultures to gain further insight to their approach to issues. The assessment gave me a view of myself which will prove important in future ventures to make personal improvements in becoming a better leader. Notably, creating personal change is often difficult when one does not understand his or her areas of weaknesses. The assessment eliminated the difficulties making it possible for me to better myself and make sure that I make the appropriate decisions in future.

Significance of Results in Relation to Behavior

The assessment results were a clear reflection of behavior in relation to personal, group and organizational behavior. They provided an appropriate source of reference on areas in which I should seek improvement in interacting with either of the three categories. In addition, they made it clear that I should not judge others without clearly understanding issues from their perspective. Instead, I should seek to know them better before taking any action. Clearly, decision-making is never an easy process and one needs to consider several factors before drawing a particular conclusion (Saaty & Peniwati, 2013). Most importantly, the assessment made it clear that one needs to assess a situation before making any decisions pertaining to it. Finding a solution to a particular issue requires that one understands the context of the problem and the implications a particular solution would have on the different stakeholders.

References

Diddams, M., & Chang, G. C. (2012). Only human: Exploring the nature of weakness in authentic leadership. The Leadership Quarterly, 23(3), 593-603.

Goleman, D., & Boyatzis, R. (2008). Social intelligence and the biology of leadership. Harvard Business Review, 86(9), 74-81.

Gregory S. A., Russell, R. F., & Patterson, K. (2004). Transformational versus servant leadership: A difference in leader focus. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 25(4), 349-361.