Unit 9

We are going through a time of accelerating change; in some aspects the change is faster than some can fathom keep up with. The things that are changing the fastest are “technology, communications and computing technologies” (Smart, 2015). When we think accelerating change, the one area that comes to mind is technology. I think technology is the driver for accelerated change in all these other fields. I believe we are all witnessing this acceleration in our respective fields. In the filed of medicine the advances being made in research are sometimes mind boggling, from neuroscience to organ transplants, to laser and robotics in surgery, as well as disease research. In daily clinical practice, there have been changes in the way we deliver care, and how we maintain our records. Telemedicine is being employed to provide care to patients in remote areas. Our patients have the capability to communicate with us through the internet, they can also check their labs, visits etc through online patient portals. Conferences are streamed via skype or teleconference. Technology has also made easy for management to conduct their meetings; it is no longer necessary for people to be in the same room, they can hold meeting through virtual meeting rooms, or conference calls.

I am not sure this ties with the topic of our activity, but Jack Ma had some very wise words. He seems to be the kind of leader who follows the transformational-servant leadership- “Customers are number 1, employees number 2, shareholder number 3” (Ma, 2016).

As per Shadraconis (2013), “During a crisis, information, plans, and structures that were once relevant may no longer be applicable. Strictly transactional leadership is not sufficient to meet the new demands of a rapidly changing environment. In times of uncertainty, transformational leaders clarify roles and provide guidance to followers. Furthermore, transformational leaders guide followers through the sensemaking process during a crisis by developing a compelling vision that emphasizes transcending self-interest for the overall benefit of the collective that may ultimately mean the survival of the organization.”

Businesses big and small have had to integrate technology into their strategy to keep up with competition and maintain their standards. Lets take Walmart for example. As per Smoak (2016) Walmart were pioneers in bar code scanning and analyzing point of sale information; they launched their own satellite systems in the mid 1980s to manage their supply chain processes. From Smoaks article I also learned that Walmart has a ‘build rather than buy’ approach, and they apply this to their IT development as well. They are also investing in development of their online presence to keep up with changing customer preferences. When Wal-Mart is looking to develop new systems it dispatches its top engineers to perform “regular” operations jobs so they can gain working hand knowledge of the challenges that line employees face (Boyer, 2003)

I am not very technologically savvy to be able to comment on how big businesses or service organizations could have managed their technology use better or differently. What I can comment on is that there is a very big scope for technology in improving how health care is provided. This is a topic that requires a bigger platform, as there are many moving parts and ramifications, with a lot of players involved. One thing I feel very strongly about is how use technology can be used to make health care more affordable and more widely accessible.

References

Boyer, J. (February, 2003). Technology Helps Stores Order Only As Much As They’ll Sell. Albany Times Union. Retrieved from Factiva

Shadraconis, Sophon (2013) “Organizational Leadership in Times of Uncertainty: Is Transformational Leadership the Answer?,” LUX: A Journal of Transdisciplinary Writing and Research from Claremont Graduate University: Vol. 2: Iss. 1, Article 28. Retrieved from http://scholarship.claremont.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1027&context=lux

https://anthonysmoak.com/2016/07/21/more-than-you-want-to-know-about-wal-marts-technology-strategy-part-1/

Theory of change. John Smart- Leadership or Tech Change. (2015, April, 8). Retried from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QhdWqLNUJns

“Keys to Success from Jack Ma”. (2016, June, 23). Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9WjHZ5wLe6w

I am writing in response to Sadie’s post https://create.twu.ca/sadiethompson/2017/11/18/unit-8-la-1/

I am glad she brought to light the issue women in the workplace who are contemplating motherhood. I was fortunate in having had plenty of help bringing up my children , and having a supportive family that I could rely on  before I moved to the North American continent.

I have seen a lot of friends and colleagues struggle with this. As I wrote in one of my previous responses, women ( and women alone)  have the gift ( some call it responsibility ) of being the bearers of our future children. In my opinion this should automatically out them at an exalted position, instead women are thought of as liabilities or disadvantages. It is a well established fact that in addition to child bearing, most of the child rearing responsibilities also fall upon women. I don’t claim to have answer to this issue that leaders and women’s advocates have grappled with for decades. What I do know that society needs to rally around our women and make them feel supported in their struggle to fulfil family and work responsibilities. As Sadie points out that to bring about a change in values, education has to begin in childhood. The current generation of leaders in hiring positions were brought up with different values, but with new awareness and education, hopefully the next generations will appreciate the role of women in the workplace better.

This is in response to Timothy DeHaan’s post

U8 – LA2 – BP1

It is heartening to hear that there are some men who are very comfortable with women holding leadership roles alongside them or sometimes above them. On the other hand Tim also brings to light the point that traditionally and also in some religions men have been considered to be the leaders and women as the supporters. I am not a religious scholar, but from what little I know of all religions, this is the basic premise of all of them. While this was a well accepted model which worked for in those times, the present times are markedly different.  There were no roles for women in the hunter-gatherer side of community life, and women were relegated to the home and child care responsibilities. We live in very different times . And changing times need change in rules and perceptions. The debate around whether women have a place in the workplace is a very archaic one  and I believe has been settled a couple of generations prior to us . Women are key players in the workplace and everyone seems to have come to terms with that, to a more or less extent. What we as a society now need to think now is whether we are going to give the women equal opportunities or we are going to be roadblocks in their progress, with the futile hope of regressing to past times ? Being a woman with leadership aspirations, to me this is a very simple matter of choice. If a woman wants to be a home maker , then society needs to applaud her for her contribution, If she chooses to be in the workplace, then all anyone needs to do is give her a fair and equal opportunity. Women do have an added biological responsibility ( or gift ) of being the bearers of the next generation. If anything, this should afford them an exalted position, rather than them getting penalized for it.

Unit 8 activity 3

My take away from the video ‘Unconscious bias @work- making the unconscious conscious’ (2014), was that our environment and past experiences exert influences on our decision making that we are not always aware of. To avoid letting our unconscious bias affect our perception of people and hence decision making, we need to always be on guard about it. This is also an exercise in critical thinking. In another YouTube video titled ‘Understanding unconscious bias’(2015) the speaker mentions that the “unconscious mind can process information faster than the conscious mind… by creating shortcuts”. Since then I have consciously been critical of my first impressions, and not always trusting them, since they might be a product of my bias.   

In the Trusted 10 exercise, at first I was floundering and not able to make sense of my results. I then decided to split the exercise into 2 part: in the first part I wrote names of 10 people I know socially and the second part was done with 10 people I know professionally. The results surprised me! My social group were 8 women and 2 men. They were all in the age group 40-50 years, similar ethnicity and background as me. In terms of education they were variable from high school to post graduate. In the professional group, there was more diversity. Out of the ten people that came to mind, 6 were women and 4 men, they were mixed in terms of religion and ethnic background, all with graduate or post grad education, ages 40-60. A possible theory to explain this difference is that I don’t have control over work place demographic mix, whereas in my social life I can choose who I interact with. I did not attempt the ring activity with the workplace people. In the social group the people in the innermost ring were the ones who were most like me, or similar to me in most of the parameters on the worksheet. My explanation for this is that when it comes to ‘people i can trust in my home’, there is an instinctive gravitation towards people who are alike you in as many respects as possible. 

I am very glad that in the workplace my results were more varied and diverse. I know it for a fact that at work I am very comfortable with people from different backgrounds and with different abilities. I will take this awareness into my future role as leader. In any hiring or promotions, I will always be critical of my motive behind the decision, and most importantly not let first impressions be the determinant of a person’s ability. As for allocating ‘stretch assignments’ to motivate employees, as mentioned in the Unit notes, I would be more cautious. I agree that giving someone a task that is slightly outside their comfort zone, could be a great motivator to excel. At the same time leaders have to be aware of the limitations of employees’ abilities, so as not to give them a task that is beyond their ability, and hence set them up for failure. There is a very thin line between ‘pushing the boundaries’ and failure. Leaders carry the responsibility of ensuring that employees are adequately challenged, but not at the cost of having them fail and hence lose confidence, and jeopardizing organizational goals in the process.

References

Unconscious Bias @ Work — Making the Unconscious Conscious. (2014, September 25). Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NW5s_-Nl3JE&feature=youtu.be

Understanding unconscious bias. (2015, November, 17). Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dVp9Z5k0dEE

 Unit notes, Unit 8

Unit 8 activity 2

In the Gender-Leader Implicit Association test, I scored -1. This indicates that I do not associate male with leader, and female with supporter. I suppose this is not surprising given that I am female, and pursuing education in leadership. After I went through the test, I did think of a few other women in my life and wondered how they would fare on this test!

The Catalyst Report did not have a definition for inclusion that I understood and connected with, so I researched other resources. “Inclusion is a call to action within the workforce that means actively involving every employee’s ideas, knowledge, perspectives, approaches, and styles to maximize business success.” (Shirley Engelmeier, 2012, as quoted in an interview to Forbes). As per the catalyst report employees feel included when they experience ‘uniqueness’ and ‘belonging’. When employees feel unique and that they belong, they report feeling team oriented and innovative. When they feel excluded or devalued, it might compromise job performance and satisfaction.

I am fortunate to work in a field that has a significant female representation. This is particularly the case in my organization; most of the staff in my clinic is female, and there seems to be proportionate representation in leadership. Healthcare in my opinion is one of the fields where gender bias is not as predominant as in some other fields. I believe another field where the gender representation is more or less balanced is education. I confess that this is my anecdotal experience, and not supported by data. This in fact was disproved after I read the article provided by our prof in her update- “even in culturally feminine settings such as nursing, librarianship, elementary education, and social work (all specifically studied by sociologist Christine Williams), men ascend to supervisory and administrative positions more quickly than women”. (Eagly & Carli, 2007). This was indeed an eye opener for me! I stand corrected, and humbled.

I will list a few of the things that I think any workplace would benefit from having in place, to foster sense of belonging amongst women-

-educate and train leaders and employees about gender based bias and prejudice.

-promote opportunities for women to bring up their concerns without fear of retaliation, especially if the leadership is male predominant.

-provide opportunities for flexible work hours, or work-from-home options where applicable.

-adopt family friendly policies for women with families, especially younger families.

-peer mentorship.

-non punitive culture towards women in relation to pregnancy and maternity related issues.

-consider allowing women of child bearing age and women with young children a few more days of leave (I say this with some trepidation, as I am sure this could open the doors to a plethora of other questions and concerns, and could be construed as biased in itself)

Following are some ideas that the Catalyst report enlists to improve overall employee sense of inclusion:

“-pay attention to the human elements.( Travis & Pollack)

-monitor progress and communicate with employees.

-have one to one meetings, seek feedback.

-role model inclusive behavior.

-avoid making jokes about a particular demographic.

-make inclusion visible to employees.

-be liberal in giving credit.”

There were some very valuable suggestions by Eagly & Carli (2007), to help navigate ‘the labyrinth’. These are more applicable to our previous activity, but I will mention it here since I read this article after I had posted my blog for the first activity-I quote from the article:

“-Increase people’s awareness of the psychological drivers of prejudice toward female leaders, and work to dispel those perceptions.

-Change the long-hours norm.

-Reduce the subjectivity of performance evaluation.

-Use open-recruitment tools, such as advertising and employment agencies, rather than relying on informal social networks and referrals to fill positions.

-Ensure a critical mass of women in executive positions—not just one or two women—to head off the problems that come with tokenism.

-Avoid having a sole female member of any team.

-Help shore up social capital.

-Prepare women for line management with appropriately demanding assignments.

-Establish family-friendly human resources practices.

-Allow employees who have significant parental responsibility more time to prove themselves worthy of promotion.

-Welcome women back.

-Encourage male participation in family-friendly benefits.”

I will close by mentioning a few other noteworthy points from the Catalyst Report. As per them inclusion and exclusion co-exist in the workplace. Inclusion is usually invisible, and exclusion is more obvious, or ‘salient’ as the authors call it.They also point out that there is a common perception that diversity is synonymous with inclusion, whereas this is infact not the case.

References:

Eagly, A. & Carli, L.L. (2007).  Women and the labyrinth of leadership. Harvard Business Review.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/danschawbel/2012/05/13/how-companies-can-benefit-from-inclusion/#736344dd223d

http://www.catalyst.org/system/files/the_day_to_day_experiences_of_workplace_inclusion_and_exclusion.pdf

Unit 8, activity 1

The term ‘Glass ceiling’ was first coined by Hymowitz & Schellhardt (1986), who were Wall Street Journal reporters. The glass ceiling is defined by Wikipedia as “a metaphor used to represent an invisible barrier that keeps a given demographic (typically minorities) from rising beyond a certain level in a hierarchy”. A very famous example of this in recent times is Hillary Clinton not getting elected to the US presidency despite being a very qualified candidate. Eagly & Carli (2007) argue that this term is a misnomer, as it inadequately represents the challenges that a certain demographic might face on their way to the top. They argue the term ceiling implies that the lower positions are more easily accessible, and that there is this “single, invisible, and impassable barrier”. They propose an alternate term- ‘the glass labyrinth’- representing the challenges that women must face at multiple levels, and not just at the top.

The Case Study 15.1 (NOrthouse, 2016) is a classic example of this metaphor. The glass labyrinth model as described by Northouse, citing several authors, gives three types of explanations for this phenomenon (Northouse, 2016, p. 399-406) – difference in investment in human capital, gender differences in men and women, and prejudice. In the case of Lisa the first explanation does not seem to be applicable; from her educational achievements we can assume that she is at par with her colleagues. There is also no mention of family commitments. She does appear to have a different style of leadership from her peers. She appears to be engaging more in a transformative style of leadership, by being available for advice to her peers. She also has trouble with self-promotion as is evidenced by her reluctance to correct her boss’ misconceptions about her competence. She is eager to be seen as a team player. Eagly and Johnson (1990); van Engen & Willemsen (2004), say that ‘women lead in a more democratic, or participative, manner than men’. Lisa is epitomizing this statement. The third explanation of prejudice seems to be very much in play here. For undisclosed reasons her boss seems to be convinced that her male colleagues have more knowledge than her. She is forced to make the decision to quit the firm because she does not see a future for herself in the face of such bias.

In the section ‘Navigating the labyrinth’, Northouse (2016, pp. 406-408), the authors propose some solutions- changing gendered assumptions, encouraging flexibility and diversity in hiring, women starting their own ventures etc. What I found interesting is that there isn’t much discussion about how to tackle work place prejudice. Lisa is stuck working for a boss who is clearly prejudicial. Bosses like everybody else are a product of their upbringing and background; biases and prejudices included. I think everybody who is making decisions about promotions, should have education and training in recognizing their bias. There should also be personality tests to promote awareness among leaders about their often-unrecognized biases. A great example of gender bias was reported by Goldin & Rouse in 2000, where they found that orchestras that auditioned applicants while hidden behind a screen increased the proportion of women applicants being selected. How can this gender blindness be applied to hiring and promotions is a challenge that organizations needs to take up.

Our Unit notes mention that somehow blinding resumes could help reduce the bias. While this would help getting women selected to a position within an organization, this does not ensure they will be given an equal chance at promotion, as was the case with Lisa. Organizations must focus on training and education to ensure that gender discrimination is acknowledged and dealt with, so that women leaders are allowed the same opportunities as their male counterparts.

References

Eagly, A.H., & Carli, L.L., (2007). Through the labyrinth: The truth about how women become leaders. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.

Eagly, A.H., & Johnson, B.T. (1990). Gender and leadership and style: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 108, 233-256.

Goldin, C., & Rouse, C. (2000). Orchestrating impartiality: The impact of “blind” auditions on female musicians. American Economic Review, 90, 715-740.

Hymowitz, C., & Schellhardt, T.D. (1986). The glass ceiling: Why women can’t seem to break the invisible barrier that blocks them from the top jobs. The Wall Street Journal, pp. D1, D4-D5.

Van Engen, M.L., & Willemsen, T.M. (2004). Sex and leadership styles: A meta-analysis of research published in the 1990s. Psychological Reports, 94, 3-18.

Glass Ceiling. (2017, November 12). In Wikipedia. Retrieved November 12, 2017), from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glass_ceiling.

Unit notes. https://create.twu.ca/ldrs500/unit-8/unit-8-notes/.

This is in response to Rob’s post

Unit 7 Activity 1: Ethics in Leadership

He is right in quoting that teachers are held to higher standards and are judged more strictly. Having said that, I am very intrigued with the rest of his quote-” Don’t be in any rush to become a teacher, my friends” or ” We get it wrong nearly every time we open our mouths “. I don’t understand the source of this quote- sounds like it might be scripture. Yes, I agree that being the people who are shaping our next generations is a task that is loaded with responsibility, and comes with great pressures . I appreciate the humility of this quote but I do not think that everything that comes out of teachers’ mouths is wrong . I for one am a great admirer of the contributions of teachers to society. In no other profession are integrity and ethics more valuable than in teaching. Teachers are role models for students. A teacher has the power to consciously or subconsciously influence many students in their lifetime. Looks like in Rob’s experience non profits are scrutinized more carefully, as has also been mentioned in the video by Van Buren. As per her the predominant reason for this is that the source of funding on non profits makes them more liable to scrutiny.

Reference

Van Buren, J.A. ( 2013, March 29). Retrieved November 6, 2017, from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ks2QGoIq5nA .

Unit 7 activity

Implications for managers as per Wang & Oh ( 2011) : The authors quote Barling, Weber, & Kelloway (1996) saying that transformation leadership is trainable. They also have some suggestions for organizations in their selection of people to managerial positions. They refer to previous research by (Bono & Judge (2004) that transformational leadership can be predicted from characteristics like extraversion and stability. In jobs requiring little interdependence or collaboration, transactional leadership is preferable. On the other hand transformational leadership is more valuable in settings involving teamwork and collaboration among employees (Podsakoff, Ahearne, & MacKenzie, 1997). These are very interesting conclusions which could be applicable in various organizational settings. These observations could be very helpful in choosing the right person for the right job. It is also important to know that transformational leadership is more appropriate in settings where contextual performance is important, and transactional leadership is more appropriate in situations where task performance is required. Knowing this, a leader can determine what model of leadership to adopt in various settings.

The five principles of ethical leadership as per Northouse (2016, p. 341) are: respect, service, justice, honesty, and community building.

Respect: Beauchamp and Bowie (1988) point out that we should not treat others as means to an end; rather persons should be treated as having their own goals. Respect in leadership goes beyond the simplistic meaning taught to us in childhood. Respect in leadership means: approaching other people with a sense of their unconditional worth and valuable differences (Kitchener, 1984), giving credence to others’ ideas (Northouse, 2016, p.342), nurturing followers to become aware of their own needs, values, and purposes (Burns 1978), being tolerant of opposing views (Northouse, 2016, p. 342)

Service: Service in leadership is akin to beneficence in medicine, where providers have a duty to help others pursue their interests and goals (Beauchamp, Childress, 1994). Service to others is also the basis of the Servant Leadership model proposed by Greenleaf (1970, 1977)

Justice: Ethical leaders are just, they make it their priority to treat all followers equally (Northouse, 2016, p. 344). Northouse also posts that resources, rewards and punishment should all be distributed fairly

Honesty: “To be a good leader, one must be honest”, (Northouse, 2016, p.345). Why does one need to be honest to be a good leader? As per Jaksa & Pritchard (1988), dishonesty creates distrust. Northouse explains that honesty does not just mean telling the truth. It also includes being open, and representing reality fully and completely, while at the same time being sensitive to other people’s feeling.

Community building: This can also be construed as working towards a common goal. This is  incorporated in Burns’ model of transformational leadership (Burns, 1978) . In this context the organization is considered a community. Rost (1991) takes the meaning of community beyond the organization and states that the leaders and followers need to attend to community goals in addition to their own.

It is very hard for me to choose 2 out of the five principles that I think are the most important. I believe these 5 tenets are the basic requirements of any collegial human environment, and especially the workplace. If I had to rank them in order of importance, the top 2 would be honesty and respect. We spend a major proportion of our day and hence our life at our workplaces. Treating our co workers with respect and honesty goes a long way in reducing work place stress. In the leader and follower relationship, honesty and respect are a 2-way exchange. It is important that leaders are honest with their employees for the employees in turn to be honest and sincere to their work. I believe this would have a positive effect on their performance. Honesty should not only mean not telling lies. It also means “do not promise what you can’t deliver, do not hind behind spin-doctored evasions, do not suppress obligations, do not evade accountability, do not accept that the ‘survival of the fittest’ pressures of business release any of us from the responsibility to respect another’s dignity and humanity”. (Dalla Costa, 1998, p. 164).

Furthermore, employees should respect their leaders for the vision and oversight they provide. This should be reciprocated by the leaders by showing respect to employees by listening closely, being empathic and tolerating opposing views ( Northouse, 2016, p.342).

Having elaborated on 2 of the 5 principles as instructed, I would like to reiterate that in my opinion service, justice, and community building are no less important for the development of ethical leadership.

References

Barling, J., Weber, T., & Kelloway, E. K. (1996). Effects of transformational leadership training on attitudinal and financial outcomes: A field experiment. Journal of Applied Psychology, 81, 827-832.

Beauchamp, T.L., & Bowie, N.E. ( !988). Ethical theory and business (3rd ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Beauchamp, T.L., & Childress, J.F. (1994). Principles of biomedical ethics (4th ed.). New York: Oxford University Press.

Bono, J. E., & Judge, T. A. (2004). Personality and transformational and transactional leadership: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89, 901-910.

Burns, J.M. (1978). Leadership. New York: Harper & Row.

Dalla Costa, J. (1998). The ethical imperative: Why moral leadership is good business. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

Greenleaf, R.K. (1997). Servant leadership: A journey into the nature of legitimate power and greatness. New York-Paulist.

Jaksa, J. A., & Pritchard, M.S. (1988). Communications ethics: Methods oof analysis. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.

Podsakoff, P. M., Ahearne, M., & MacKenzie, S. B. (1997). Organizational citizenship behavior and the quantity and quality of work group performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82, 262-270.

Rost, J.C. (1991). Leadership for twenty-first century. New York: Praeger.

Wang,G & Oh, I.S. (2011)Transformational Leadership and Performance Across Criteria and Levels: A Meta-Analytic Review of 25 Years of Research. Group & Organization Management: An International Journal Volume: 36 Issue 2