Supportive and Humanistic Leaders are More Effective

Both style and communication intertwine tightly around the effectiveness of leaders.  Reinout de Vries and Angelique Bakker-Pieper conducted research on 279 employees in government agencies to understand the communication styles on human-oriented and leadership outcomes  (2010). They used the six main communication styles of verbal aggressiveness, expressiveness, preciseness and assuredness, supportiveness and argumentativeness. 

Leadership communication style bases its effectiveness on the need to maximize hierarchical relationships to reach goals (Daft, 2003). Communication has a purpose and is goal oriented. Communication seeks to enhance and influence the environment in one form or another. The ultimate goal is often dependent on the leader who seeks either collective or self-gain. 

Communication is about knowledge sharing. It is a process where individuals exchange tacit and explicit information to create new knowledge (Van den Hoof and De Ridder, 2004). Communication helps participants bring forward new information and connect them together in ways that have more meaning for them. The more someone communicates with others the more they understand both the issues at hand and the potential solutions. 

Charismatic and human-oriented leadership correlated with perceived leadership performance, satisfaction with that leader, and employee’s commitment. Likewise, Leadership supportiveness had a strong correlation with knowledge sharing. Both styles were stronger than correlations with task-oriented leadership. 

The authors contend that leadership supportiveness appears to be the strongest communication approach and has positive associations with leadership styles and outcome.  This find makes sense if we consider that leadership is about influence and drawing people in through supportive, humanistic, and knowledge sharing behaviors that helps others solve their own problems and sets higher expectations.  Leaders who excessively focus on tasks may be less successful if their subordinates do not understand the greater purpose of the tasks, do not feel connected to it, and do not know how to achieve it. 

De Vries & Bakker-Pieper, W. (2010). Leadership=communication? The relations of leaders’ communication styles with leadership styles, knowledge sharing and leadership outcomes. Journal of Business & Psychology, 25 (3). 

Daft, R. (2003). Management (6^th Edition). Cincinnati, Oh: South-West.

Van den Hoof & Hendrix, (2004). Eagerness and willingness to hare: the relevance of different attitudes towards knowledge sharing. Paper presented at the Fifth European Conference on Organizational Knowledge, Learning and Capabilities: Innsbruck, Australia.

How Online Learning can Foster Global Perspectives and Leadership

The world is changing and the interconnected nature of cultures and information is moving forward at a rapid pace. The need for global perspectives and education that meets those global needs is particularly important if difficult problems will be solved. Research by Gibson, et. al. (2008) delves into fostering higher levels of global perspective within the gifted population to ensure that there is a stream of leadership abilities available for the future. 

Globalization is seen as related to the interconnectivity of trade, technology, and the environment (Adams & Carfagna, 2006). The elements within the system begin to create higher levels of influence on each other and new ways are thinking are needed to handle the constant stream of information. The end effects of globalization include interdependence, interconnectedness, and culture diversity (Anheier, et. al, 2001). 

Global learning provides new opportunities for human advancement and skill development. Business distribution networks and government decisions no longer exist in a vacuum but have far reaching implications. Through the use of distance education it is possible that students can collaborate across cultural boarders to learn shared perspectives and additional cultural awareness. This knowledge can be used in business, governance, or general humanity.

Such cross-cultural education offers opportunities to maximize critical thinking, intercultural communication competence, collaboration, teamwork, reflective practices, dispositions and values (Roeper, 1988). These skills are sorely needed in society as the stakeholder pool widens. Without the ability to understand information at a greater level, society is doomed to repeat the same mistakes over and over. 

The gifted population has the capacity to move out of the pattern of events. They often worry about such issues as the environment, trade, hunger, peace, disease and terrorism (Gibson, et. al, 2008). They have the ability to understand these issues in greater levels and feel compassionate about the consequences on others. They are motivated by understanding and have the predispositions to engage in global learning due to their sensitivity and tolerance of others (Van Tassel-Baska, 1998).  They are highly sensitive to moral issues and the rights of others in global social issues (Clark, 2008). 

The process of global learning is the creation of global awareness related to various issues that impact the population. Global learners have the capacity to understand the interconnectedness and interdependence of the world. They must have effective reflection, intrapersonal intelligence, and metacognitive abilities. In other words, they must have the ability to reflect on choices and culture and understand their overall implications. 

The authors suggest that global learning is fostered through either face-to-face cultural interactions or through online collaborative projects. Students engage in online projects with others from varying backgrounds and dispositions. Using gifted students from different countries helps to ensure that the learning is not derailed by the limited perspective of more ethnocentric members. As this population is more open to understanding, empathizing, and helping they are a natural group to foster global learning and citizenship. 

This paper helps highlight the need to think beyond local and national culture. As the world becomes more complex and business more global in their operations, understanding the nuances of these changes will become important for leadership. The gifted population often races ahead of the general population and this makes them prime subjects for understanding the changes that are likely to occur in the future as general awareness increases. Whether one is situated on campus or in the buzz of cyber world, having students interact with those of varying cultures makes graduates more prepared to work in the global marketplace.

Adams, J. & Carfagna, A. (2006). Comitif; of a^e in a fiíoha Üzed world: The next generation. Bloumsfield. CT: Kutnarian Press.

Anheier,  et. al. (2001 ). Introducing global civil society. In H. K. Anheier. M. Glasius. »S: M. Kaldor (Eds.). Global civil society (pp. 3-22). New York: Oxford University Press.

Clark, B. (2008). Growing up gifted: Developing the potential of children at home and at .•school (7t.h ed.). Upper Saddle River. NJ: Pear.son Education.

Gibson, et. al.  (2004). Gaining multiple perspectives in gifted education through global learning reflection. Australian Journal of Gifted Education. 12, 34-40.

Gibson, et. al. (2008). Developing global awareness and responsible world citizenship with global learning. Roeper Review, 30 (1). 

Roeper. A. (1988). Should educators of the gifted and talented be more eoncemed with world issues? Roeper Review, ¡I, 12-13.

Van Tassel-Baska, J. (1998). Appropriate curriculum for the talented learner. In J. Van Tassel-Baska (Ed.), Excellence in educating gifted and talented ¡earners (pp. 339-361 ). Denver, CO: Love.

Become an Influencer-Learning the Art of Persuasion

Improving on communication skills and influencing is extremely important for potential success.  A paper by Johnson and Young (2012) discusses the concepts of influencing others to achieve objectives. Their advice appears to be practical in the sense that it continues to expand the network creating more adherents. It also takes into account the natural resistance people display and how to overcome those concerns. 

Most people tune out a significant amount of daily conversation and lots of information is lost from one day to the next. To attract someone’s interests it is sometimes necessary to do or ask something interesting. In sales they may call this “making the pitch” but in daily conversation it is more of “tuning in” to potential engagement.

Most people are receptive to things that help them. Explaining concepts through their vantage point and the potential benefits of certain actions helps them to visualize the possibilities. Focusing on encouraging others to engage the solution is helpful to developing personal influence.  You can’t be influential without other people.

Before one can properly influence others they need to have the right questions. This is a process of brainstorming and thinking about all of the alternatives. Asking the right questions can prompt other people to start thinking about the answers and if their answers logically lead to your conclusions you are likely to find support.

Each organization comes with other influencers and connecting them together creates systematic impact. Communicating with opinion leaders and power brokers creates the ability to render converts to a cause and then move those ideas throughout an organization. The more people, who hear, understand and pass on the concepts the more influence that is created. 

People want to quantify the concepts. They want to envision, touch, taste and see the ideas. Speaking in terms of tangibles helps people understand and create a mental framework that solidifies the concepts. This allows them to formalize, ponder, and finally conclude with their agreement.

People want to understand your message. Use the language of your audience. This means using the terms, vocabulary, education level and at times even the slang others use. Helping people understand the message means speaking in a way that allows for easy connection to the concepts. 

It is beneficial to work in a group and allow multiple vantage points and perspectives to make their way into the solutions. Doing so will afford greater allies in your quest. People have varying perspectives and these perspectives can be used to help ensure that concepts make sense to a greater amount of people. 

Developing greater presentations with graphics, charts, and content helps people solidify the information. Just like in sales a great presentation can provide for higher levels of understanding. It can draw interest and put things in a tangible form. 

Don’t believe that you are infallible. Continually learn from your mistakes to improve upon your influencing abilities. Some things work while others do not. If you continue to learn you are likely to improve over time and create greater abilities. 

The report doesn’t talk about truth but it should be included as an influencing argument. People don’t want someone to “pull the wool over their eyes” or “blow smoke” and will be naturally resistant to those who have an unyielding agenda. Rightly so, an over demanding agenda means they have not evaluated the alternatives and their concerns are limited. People want to hear the strengths and potential pitfalls so that they can understand the credibility of the speaker. Those who think they know all the answers usually don’t. 

Johns, W. & Young, N. (2012). Power of persuasion: becoming the influencer. Facilities Manager, 28 (3)

How Does Improper Use of Power Limit Group Performance?

Most people who have been in the working world for sometime have come across a situation where a single person uses power and authority with a dominating communication style to push their will on a corporate board, team, or workplace. Research by Tost, et. al (2013) discusses some of the pitfalls of doing so and the eventual decline of team performance. As performance declines so does the ability of organizations to generate income through collaborative effort and idea generation. 

Politicized workplaces are stressful and generally unproductive. According to Eisenhardt and Bourgeois (1988), when there is power inequality within the workplace political conflict rises and team performance declines. Teams should be well balanced to ensure that there is equity of power and the ability to discuss concepts openly for better idea generation. 

Power should be used to help push good ideas through to create greater productivity. However, when power is used to diminish the brainstorming process the best ideas do not come forward. There is a natural propensity for people to defer all major decisions to those that have the formal power. We all know that those that have the formal power do not always know the right answers or have failed to grasp alternative positions. Power, Leadership and Formal Authority can be summed up as follows:

Power: The ability of a person to control outcomes, how people perceive expenses, or push people in certain behaviors (Keltner, et. al, 2003). 

Leadership: The ability to influence others to work toward group objectives and goals (Bass, 2008). 

Formal Authority: Holding a position that that allows for a specific role within social hierarchy (Peabody, 1962).

Power, leadership, and formal authority maintain the ability to influence the outcomes of the group’s decisions. There are times when this can be beneficial once a final decision has been made and concise action is needed. However, preempting or cutting short the decision process may end up costing the organization later in terms of strategic outcomes as well as future willingness of employees to express themselves fully. 

Open communication within teams is essential in determining of the team’s performance (Dionne et. al, 2004).  Freethinking employees are more likely  to make novel solutions. Strategic decisions require the ability to perceive and understand various outcomes. As thoughts build on each other, open communication affords a better brain storming session. 

The authors conclude that the formalization of power into the hand of an individual limits the overall team performance. The leader’s subjective perspectives of power leads them to seek additional power derailing the performance process. The more power a leader feels the more their behavior changes and the more people defer to their power. Followers must willingly give up the power for the leader to gain additional influence. 

The research is important for avoiding the concepts of “group think” which limits a team’s performance. As leaders become more engrained in the perception of their power gain, the more their behavior prompts team members to give up the authority. The end result of such power deference is poor decisions, poor consequences, and potentially disastrous results. Even though it is possible for a single person to break the cycle by asking the right questions the social structure may try and force adherence leading to a lack of empowerment and performance for the whole group.

Bass, B. M. 2008. The Bass handbook of leadership: Theory, research, and managerial applications. New York: Free Press.

Dionne, et. al (2004). Transformational leadership and team performance. Journal of Organizational Management, 17: 177–194.

Eisenhardt, K.  & Bourgeois, L. (1988). Strategic decision making in high-velocity environments: Toward a midrange theory. Academy of Management Journal, 31: 737–770.

Keltner, et. al. (2003). Power, approach, and inhibition. Psychological Review, 110: 265–284.

Peabody, R. (1962). Perceptions of organizational authority: A comparative analysis. Administrative Science Quarterly, 6: 463–482.

Tost, et. al. (2013). When power makes others speechless: the negative impact of leader power on team performance. Academy of Management Journal, 56 (5).