Skip to main content

Great Leadership Exercise

 

Great Leadership Exercise

I recently took part in an exercise by Dr. Richard Boyatzis in which he asked his audience to complete two side-by-side lists for comparison of two leaders we previously knew or worked for. The first leader was to be someone we’d jump at the chance to work for again. This person should be an individual that we’re drawn to and want to be around. The second leader was someone we gravitate away from, because of how poorly they manage, and lead. To the point made by Boyatzis, it is very easy to see what makes up “great leadership”. It isn’t difficult to understand why I, or someone else would want to either be around a leader or move away from them as fast as possible. Let’s take a look at what I’m talking about below.

Words That Describe My Leader Comparisons

Good leader                                                                             Poor leader

Inspiring                                                                                    Inconsiderate

Forgiving                                                                                   Demanding

Trusting                                                                                     Unforgiving

Flexible                                                                                      Rigid

Engaging                                                                                   Uncaring

Forgiving                                                                                   Angry

While the words to describe the good leader don’t necessarily correlate to the words to describe the poor leader, its clear as day to see why I would want to be around the good leader as opposed to the poor leader. We learn at an early age what is good, and what is bad. Later in life, we must be reminded of what we’ve learned when we’re younger. The golden rule is alive and well: people treat one another as they’d like to be treated themselves (Boyatzis & McKee, 2005, p. 25). What stands out most about this exercise is that the words on the left are those traits that most people want to follow, which is good! The words on the right are ones we shouldn’t follow, because they’re bad. As I’ve previously written, some leaders are insulators, whereby they knew just enough to be dangerous, but not enough to be blamed for things (Thomey, 2020, p. 3). While this all may seem simple, yet an interesting mix of adjectives, it points us to resonant leadership. Those good words on the left are key indicators of someone that truly cared about our relationship and used traits to not just simply get the work done. I don’t know about you, but shouldn’t we all try and use the good traits?

References

Boyatzis, R., and McKee, A. (2005). Resonant Leadership. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.

Thomey, M. (2020). Building Trust. Unpublished. Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Dear Marques

  Dear Marques, You’ve continued to gain a lot more knowledge of leadership, the foundational approaches using different aspects from the elements of theories, and a profound appreciation for senior leaders. The question before you today is – what will you do to get back to the mountain top? Your Personal Vision You’ve stated that your personal vision is “to be happy as much as possible” (Thomey, 2021, p. 2). We both know that you were at your best when you were happiest. Whether on the mountain top or not, you brought out the best in yourself when you were happy. You need to find a way to get back to that place so everything else can fall into place. Three Learning Goals In order to accomplish your personal vision, you must establish three learning goals with milestones so that you have a plan and a pathway for getting this done. Your first goal should be to reengage with the Dale Carnegie group for continuing education classes. I know you found this group to have a tra...
Post a Comment
Read more

Consequentialism vs Deontology

  Consequentialism vs Deontology Is it a glass half-empty or a glass half-full? It appears to me that what separates consequentialism and deontology is perspective. LaFollette (2007) writes that consequentialists must explain which consequences we should count, how much weight or consideration we should give those that do count, and how we should use these considerations when deliberating (p. 25). However, deontology is usually regarded as a foil to consequentialism ( Heinzelmann, 2018, p. 5201). What I find as the takeaway from this situation is that consequentialism isn’t necessarily grounded in morality, whereas deontology finds itself in a set of negative rules. As LaFollette points out with consequentialism, we must look at and use several dimensions to understand and consider what are the consequences of a situation. Deontology doesn’t require this additional gate check, but instead relies on our experience learning right and wrong from the negative perspective. Much like a...
Post a Comment
Read more