Mobile Edition
Print
Get the Mag
Weekly UpdatesINTRODUCTION
Firm competitive behavior and the sustained effort to remain effective and competitive are very important attributes of successful organizations. As Offstein and Gnyawali (2004) have pointed out, few researchers have carefully and exclusively examined human factors as antecedents to firm competitive behavior. Some researchers such as Hambrick et al. (1996) have examined the human dimension in some ways, however, there are few such studies. Yet, we can be reasonably confident that the human capital (that is, individual knowledge, skills, attitudes, predispositions) of an organization can contribute a great deal to the improvement of the organization's competitive intensity and success as the human capital may have extensive knowledge of the organization's competitive environment and, as well, may be prepared to engage in a variety of complex and strategic actions.
In an effort to stimulate positive change in the capability of organizations to improve their competitive talents, this paper proposes an approach to leadership development that makes use of chains of independent and interdependent interaction sequences, transactional episodes, in which an individual systematically seeks to: 1) project leader attributes towards others, and, concomitantly, 2) effectively employ selected influence tactics to gain commitments and compliance of others. The overall process of becoming skilled in these influence behaviors we have labeled autogenic leadership development or ALD. Reflecting on the recent work and criticism of management education and training by Ghoshal (2005), ALD is a means to forward an intentional, ethical approach to leading that incorporates concepts grounded on the reinforcement of social order and the use of positive impression management methods.
Propositions
ALD rests on two ideas that seek to guide individuals in attempts at leadership. The two ideas are the guiding beacons that demonstrate what has to be achieved in order for one to become more influential. ALD is an action model that ultimately prescribes specific influence behavior to use in work and other social situations to help an individual manage progress. From the body of research literature in the areas of communication, leadership, influence, social psychology, management and others, we know two things with some certainty. First, most people with whom we interact with will form some opinions about us as to our capability to influence them and others. Often, these opinions or attitudes towards us are formed by others rather early in our encounters with them. People will do this whether or not they possess much information about us.
Proposition # 1
It is possible for you to learn to behave in certain ways to assist others to perceive you as relatively influential. People can learn to do this skillfully.
Second, most people attribute influence or leadership to those individuals who have helped them make progress in some way or have helped them get what they want.
Proposition # 2
There are influence tactics for you to use that help others to act, to commit to act, or to comply with what you would like for them to do. One can learn to use these tactics skillfully so as to achieve positive results.
This paper helps to establish bases regarding how to use influence to achieve results. It is important to obtain results because we want to achieve what we set out to do, and, if we are associated with obtaining desired results, others associate us with success and effectiveness. To some extent, these assertions parallel and add to the Path-Goal Theory (House, 1996). Further, the perceptions and beliefs others have toward us about our ability to influence them and about our. ability to achieve success may develop into expectations others have about us. In brief, owing to repeated interactions our leadership and our influence are anticipated.
Autogenic leadership development is a general model of leader behavior as well as a guide to behavior that can be practiced in everyday and in extraordinary circumstances. It is something one can practice on a daily basis, that is, it can form a learning action plan (see, for example, Raelin, 2000, p. 133) ALD recognizes that leadership is not necessarily limited by one's background, position, training, or other attributes. We can learn to be influential in social contexts, that is, what we actually do can be more important to others than what we possess or own. Support for the basic premises of the ALD model comes from the work of Metz (1998) which calls for new leadership success models. We need models that, among other things, emphasize the competency focused development of leaders.
Practical Considerations
Behaving in ways to use influence tactics to support, nurture, participate with, coach, question, and actively listen to others is characteristic of ALD. The researchers Lindell and Rosenqvist (1992), studied managers and leaders and found many successful leaders have a developmental orientation toward others. That is, they listen carefully, they coach, they experiment to help others learn and grow.
Very few people have the opportunity to be systematically shaped or trained as an effective leader because they simply do not have access to leadership development experiences such as leader assessment centers, executive training institutes, a highly capable mentor, or a U.S. military academy, or any combination of these experiences. These experiences are documented in detail in Giber et al. (2000). For most of us, then, a general model of leadership development, one that requires a degree of self-management, may be a practical and useful asset.
Relating to the matter of one's projection of certain general leader attributes, knowledge, skills, and attitudes, Moshavi et al. (2003) offer information that demonstrates an interesting phenomenon. That is, they found that the less the leader believed or perceived that they had a role in the productivity and performance of their employees, the employees of these "underestimators" reported more job satisfaction and supervisory satisfaction. These employees also achieved a higher level of productivity as compared with employees of leaders who overestimated their leadership ability. If we assume that projections of leaders towards their employees (subordinates) mirror or reflect what the leader believes, support for one of the key concepts in ALD is granted.
THE TRANSACTIONAL EPISODE
The transactional episode is the vehicle that houses and enacts autogenic leadership development [ALD]. The transactional episode is the setting for ALD because it provides opportunities for influence, commitments, actions and learning for each participant in the episode. These episodes are social interactions of at least two persons and each episode has a beginning and an end, for the most part, yet they are interdependent and often linked in time.
The transactional episode has four elements: background, entering, interpersonal processes, and outcomes. A linear composite of the four elements characterizes each episode. The four elements are not tidy, independent entities. Rather, there is overlap in actions, thought, and time so that distinctions among contiguous elements often are blurred.
Transactional Episode
Background--[??] Entering--[??] Interpersonal--[??] Outcomes Processes
This visual representation gives some bounds to the mental and interpersonal events that take place. It houses significant components that should be examined in a self-management context, and, it establishes the transactional episode as an address for the practice of influence activities.
Element 1--The Background
For use in the explanation of this element and the remaining three elements, we will use the example of a transaction in which one wants to present some ideas and thoughts about a matter to another person or group of persons (target) The individual simply want his/her position heard. Again, this is just an example to which we will refer in the following paragraphs.
Background is what each actor brings to the transaction and it is the composite of what all participants bring to the transaction, in the broadest sense. It is the individual knowledge, beliefs, attitudes, understandings, personal styles of knowing and learning and the like. Hermelin & Robertson (2001) remind us that cognitive ability and cognitive capacity have been repeatedly shown to be the most potent predictors of job performance regardless of the type or nature of work. This assertion is supported by the work of Reilly and Chao (1992).
Background certainly seems to be a "given," it is just there. For any transaction, especially ones in which we have some experience with the people involved in it, it is given. However, the background is always subject to influence and change for future transactions. For a moment, let's consider our example of wanting to present ideas to a person or to a group of individuals. The way we obtain, structure, and use information is likely to shape the way we present our ideas to others.
If we seek to have others understand, accept, and/or acknowledge our presentations to them, it is important for us to grasp the reality of: (a) we may have a preferred mode for attaining and using information; (b) we typically present information to others that tends to be consistent with our preferred mode or style; and, (c) some or many of the people in our "audience" may process and value information in ways that are completely different from our ways of processing information. One mode or style is not necessarily better than another one; they are merely different.
In summary, the background endures. It is there; it can or may change as a result of every transaction in which we participate. Background is malleable. In our relationships with persons with whom we have dealt for a long time, we can alter the relationships and the background by behaving differently. Background matters because it sets the stage for the quality, productivity, and tone of the transactions we have with others.
FEED