Through this thread, I will explore my personal experience with the issue of favoritism in the workplace. I will examine the leader-member exchange (LMX) theory as it analyzes and outlines the issue of workplace favoritism. After which, I will inspect the principle of self-leadership as a solution to employee or team favoritism. A or B Many years ago, I worked for a company division, which was divided into two teams with a central manager. The ‘A’ team was comprised entirely of senior, experienced employees. While the ‘B’ team contained all of the new or inexperienced employees. Being new, I was placed on the ‘B’ team. Because the manager did not have time to train any of the members, he favored the ‘A’ team and gave them numerous assignments …show more content…
The leader-member exchange (LMX) theory states, “because of time pressures, leaders establish a special relationship with a small group of their followers [the in-group, and the]…other followers fall into the out-group” (Robbins and Judge, 2009, p. 398-399). The in-group receives benefits, rewards, and attention from the leader; while, the out-group gets little of these elements (Gerstner & Day, 1997). Theorists believe the categorization of followers maybe based on a combination of three factors. First, the follower’s personal compatibility with the leader. For example, the leader and the follower are of the same ethnicity or gender. Second, the follower’s level of competence as perceived by the leader. And finally, the follower’s personality similarities with those of the leader (Robbins and Judge, 2009). My professional experience reflects all of the elements within the LMX theory. For example, due to the time constraints of training, my manager gave greater attention to the ‘A’ team based on the belief that the team had a higher level of competence. Thus, the ‘A’ team was viewed as the in-group and, based on the principle of the self-fulfilling prophecy; they performed better than the out-group ‘B’ team (Gerstner & Day,
Some journeys take longer than others, some paths are shorter and seem relatively easy to achieve; others are treacherous and feel as though one might never reach the end. These analogies complement my self-leadership journey quite eloquently. It is quite cliché to say, “nothing in life worth having comes easy”; this motto helps me continue and proves to me that everything I have worked for is worth the effort. Nurses give relentlessly of themselves; add being a wife and mother, there might not be much left over for anything else. Yet, we find a way, how do we accomplish it all? In what areas can I improve and grow stronger? How do we grow from a seedling to a great baobab tree?
Leader-member relations, which focuses on the relationships between the leader and his/her followers (Verkerk, 1990).
Kelley, R.E. (1992). Followership. In Goethals, G.R., Sorenson, G.J. & Burns, J.M. (Eds.). (2008). Encyclopedia of leadership (pp. 504-513). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
Küpers, W. (2007). Perspectives on Integrating Leadership and Followership. Retrieved 4 22, 2014, from International Journal of Leadership Studies: http://www.regent.edu/acad/global/publications/ijls/new/vol2iss3/kupers/kupers.htm
Both transformational leadership and leader-member exchange leadership theories have been an issue of discussion for many scholars. The majority of authors agree that transformational leaders ‘have qualitatively different and quantitatively greater effects on their followers than the effects of exchange leaders’ (Gupta & Krishnan 2004, p.7). This essay builds on the existing literature about these two theories and will try to draw a parallel between LMX and transformational leadership, i.e. it will reveal the different and similar qualities of supervisor-subordinate relationships. Specifically, the essay focuses on the mechanism that each style of leadership uses in developing these relationships. That will actually help to find out some differences and similarities. This paper initially revisits the main aspects of transformational leadership and LMX leadership theories and then discusses them in relation to their capacity to develop differing qualities of supervisor-subordinate relationships.
Reicher, S., Haslam, S., & Hopkins, N. (2005). Social identity and the dynamics of leadership: Leaders and followers as collaborative agents in the transformation of social reality. Leadership Quarterly, 16, 547-568. doi:10.1016/j.leaqua.2005.06.007
The Leader-Member Exchange Theory, or LMX, is a two-way relationship between management/supervisors and their employees/subordinates. The theory assumes that leaders use different management styles, leadership styles, and behaviors with each individual subordinate or group of subordinates. The exchange between supervisors and subordinates will be inconsistent between each individual member of the group. A supervisor may be very kind and supportive to one employee/group and be very critical and unresponsive to another employee/group. Due to this type of interaction, the LMX theory suggests that leaders classify subordinates into two groups, the in-group members and the out-group members (Gibson, Ivancevich, Donnelly, & Konopaske, 2012, p. 334).
Path-goal theory deals with the leader's style to motivate followers, to accomplish set goals (Northouse, 2010). The path-goal theory is simply the implication that a leader works with an individual to establish a goal. The leader does this by individual motivation to achieve the proposed goal, while working through obstacles that may hinder achieving that goal (Whitener, 2007). The basic assumption of path-goal theory is that the following motivates subordinates: the capability to perform the work, their efforts will result in a certain outcome, and the payoff will be worthwhile (Whitener, 2007). The path-goal theory is a pragmatic approach that the leader uses to motivate the followers to achieve the set goals.
In this sections of the paper I will be discussing about section #1- Explain Social Cognitive Theory and what it means to self-leadership and Who are the leaders that you feel exemplify social cognitive theory? The first part I will be discussing is about is what Social Cognitive Theory actually is. Social Cognitive Theory is a process when someone learns by watching their other coworkers do the exact same job that they need to know how to do. “In social cognitive theory, people are seen as self-organizing, proactive, self-reflecting, and self-regulating rather than as simply reactive organisms shaped by environmental forces or driven by basic inner impulses” (Chen, Nabi, Pajars, & Prestin, 2009). I feel that Social Cognitive Theory and self-leadership
managers, one who had a negative view of their employee, which was known as Theory X, and
Willoughby (2013) explains “Everyone wants to feel appreciated and everyone values a simple ‘thank you’” (para. 6). There several ways an employer can be successful at showing value in an employee and there are even more ways to show no appreciation at all. Many employers tend to have pitfalls, these pitfalls led to unhappy employees and unfortunate work results. Comaford (2013) states that emotions drive 90 percent of human behavior, showing an employee that they matter is an emotional bond and if employees feel they do not matter the organization suffers. Showing favoritism is a major pitfall shown by an employer, this can be shown through decisions, promotions, performance evaluations, and task assignments. Acknowledging people only when
...adership Practices in Relation to Productivity and Morale." In D. Cartwright and A. Zander, Group Dynamics: Research and Theory, 2nd ed. (Elmsford, NY: Row, Paterson, 1960)
Leadership is found not just at work but all around us. In any situation, leaders take a step forward and take charge of the situation. It can be at home, at work or at any other place. Leaders are never born, they become leaders because they have the credibility and people would love to follow them.
Some people were born to be great leaders and some were born to be great learners. I ask myself this question, “How was I created?” Was I born a leader or was I molded to lead. As I explain my philosophy on how I want to lead, I will first dive into my past to recognize and pin point my creator. October 27th 2004 I raise my right hand in order to serve and protect the United State against all enemies, foreign and domestic. At this moment in my young personal leadership journey, I get my first glimpse of a leadership style, “shut up and listen.”
According to Bryant (2016), “self-leadership is the process by which you influence yourself to achieve your objectives.” So how do you achieve this, you start with developing your leadership point of view. Developing my leadership point of view forced me to reflect on the leader models in my life. It also forced me to evaluate the key events and experiences from my past and determine how they have impacted me as a leader. This self-reflection process allowed me to discover who I am, what my values and beliefs are and what my true purpose is in life. Thus far, this process has made me more self-aware and self-awareness is key to self-motivation and motivating others.