Process Theory

I always thought that the idea behind the process theory was just the steps someone had to take independently and intuitively in order to reach a decision. However, after reading both the Relational Leadership Model and the Strategies for Change, I feel like the process theory concept involves quite a lot more than just yourself. What I found particularly surprising about the Relational Leadership Model was the importance this theory places on relationships and how people interact with one another in order to promote positive change or execute a goal proactively.

This reading was especially good since it showed how relationships and interactions many times are more important than skill or expertise when it comes to execution. I say this because in previous experiences I had based my decisions on working with people on who was the most capable and proficient at the task needed to be completed rather than who I would work well with and would be able to share different points of view with. This especially became a problem when the people I had chosen to work with had very different points of view from mine and due to their self-proclaimed expertise in the area were very stubborn, uncooperative, and only accepted their ideas/opinions and refused to see someone else’s perspective or possible suggestions. Thus, unfortunately due to our extreme differences in both perspectives and attitudes, the project was executed poorly due to miscommunication and I realized that it would have been better to work with people who were more open minded and inclusive rather than arrogant and one-track minded even if they had not had as much knowledge of the project.

This idea of working in a group productively also reminded me of the Strategies for Change Model since it promotes the idea to be willing to “let go of the old and safe ways of doing things”(351). However, the element that I liked most about this model was that it did not only focus on the political or large scale change (governmental) but also on smaller scales such as being able to make a change in a persons life, or a students life. This model I felt could especially be something that I could apply to my life since it teaches you not only how to work on a goal to change a political resolution, or an environmental problem but also how to better yourself and make productive changes in your own life. I for one saw the seven characteristics of real change leaders (commitment, initiative, motivation, etc) to be applicable even in my personal goals such as losing weight, being better at the piano or building more houses for habitat for humanity than had been done the previous year, since it made me think of how I as an individual needed to improve and how I could work more effectively with society, a group and myself in order to make these goals happen. Ultimately I really liked the Strategies for Change model since I felt like it didn’t only apply to leaders but to every segment of the population since it focused on the interdependency of group values, individual values and society/community values and how if these work effectively together it can create great change in society.  

The Skills Approach and Situational Approach

The Skills Approach reading I found to be very applicable and relatable to real life and very helpful when tailoring what jobs and what tasks some people would be better at than others. I especially found the idea of the three-skill approach especially interesting since it really does kind of divide people up into the three different sections/types (human, conceptual, and the technical). I found this especially true when we were doing the activity in class where we were trapped on a deserted island and had to decide who would make the best leader out of five eligible individuals. From the reading, I found someone that was very visionary and saw the big picture to be especially a great leader since they would not focus simply on the small details but rather the overall situation and its context. This was an interesting exercise to me since it allowed me to self-reflect and think about the ways I act in certain situations and it also made me realize how big of a detail person I am. I found myself describing possible scenarios or stressing on minor details or the skill set an individual possessed that could affect the choice in leader rather than who could get them off the island the fastest. However, ultimately it made me realize that when in a situation the most important skills to have (contrary to what I had previously believed) are human and conceptual skills rather than technical. I found this true when we were placed in a group and although one of the guys had very good ideas and reasons for his choice his delivery and communication wasn’t completely clear, however I felt by me and the other group members talking him through it (human/communication skills) we agreed with his decision and found it very wise, thus reinforcing the idea that human skills are the most valuable skill to possess.

When looking at the situational approach, I found this one extremely relatable, applicable and easy to understand since I felt like this is how I make day-to-day decisions. I felt like this was especially true when I reflect back on how I responded very differently to the two people who had asked me the same question and simply based on the situation I had changed my response.. When the first person (a friend) asked me if I needed to talk about something (I guess I looked upset, and I actually was,) I snapped at them and said, “No I’m fine.” However, later on when my teacher asked me if I was okay, I did not snap at her, but rather tried to mask my sadness and say I was fine. Thus leading me to realize that based on the circumstance I adapted my style/attitude based on who I was talking to. Leading me to realize that although there was not a task that needed to be accomplished and I didn’t need to be directed and supported based on the situational differences model, the situations and people themselves (the position they held- one a friend the other authority) caused me to react differently.

Trait Theory

When thinking about leadership and the traits that make a person a “Great Man” or Great Woman, I think about how well people cope, behave, relate, and deal with individuals in a situational context and also how individual(s) deal with the situation itself.  However, I feel like the central principals of the Trait Theory can influence the way people cope with a situation. The Trait Theory stems from the concept of an individual possessing a set of “special” characteristics that make them more “gifted,” or cause them to be more likely to be a talented individual when compared to someone that is simply seen as an “average person.”

As a result, this makes “ordinary folk” believe “gifted people” to be more suitable and thus more ideal to hold a leadership role or title. This set of characteristics that are more prominently seen in a “leader” include traits such as intelligence, self confidence, determination, integrity, and sociability. However, although I believe all of these traits can be seen in a large part of the population, I believe that the way in which people cope, and react to a particular situation truly defines whether or not they are a leader given an isolated circumstance.

By this I mean even if someone is great at being a “leader” in terms of dividing up the work, designating tasks and maximizing time set up, and the execution of the paper work, I think the very same person can display a different form of leadership when it comes to actually presenting the presentation in front of a group of people.

This being said, I do not mean to say that the person who presents the presentation is anymore or any less of a leader than the person who organizes the presentation itself but simply that these two types of leadership reveal two different types of leadership styles. By both individuals exhibiting their leadership strengths and abilities in different ways depending on the situation it shows that both are equally qualified yet are leaders in two totally different ways.

I can see this with myself, in the sense that in high school I was the volleyball captain one year and was able to motivate, cheer on and encourage my team through games yet when it came to public speaking I would get nervous and would prefer to have someone else take over. Yet, with that being said, I do not believe that made me any less of a leader just a different type of leader. Furthermore, I have also realized that I enjoy leading smaller groups rather than larger classes where there are more people and I feel like more expectations. Thus, when merging the knowledge I have of the trait theory and my personal experience, I would say that the past has shown me that I like to be a motivator and prefer to guide in small situations, (sports teams, group activities) than to lead and be an outspoken public speaker. Ultimately, making me realize that I do not lack the ability to be a leader but simply need to improve on those traits that are not my strongest (i.e, public speaking.)