Non-profit Ethics

What?
I am currently in the planning phases of starting a non-profit organization based around construction of musical instruments for disadvantaged youth.  We will focus on building electric and acoustic guitars and guitar amplifiers, lending them to local youth for use.  Along with the instruments, we'll provide music lessons.  All of this will be done free of charge for the purpose of focused mentoring of youth in our local community through the vehicle of music.

After reading the section on ethics in Northouse (2010), it became clear to me that I have not explicitly defined the ethical foundation for the organization.  Which ethical theories should be adopted by the organization?

So What?
The ethics to which an organization holds itself are central to that organization's success.  As Thomas, Schermerhorn, and Dienhart (2004) note, "business executives can and must realize that the bottom line of business success always includes an ethics component" (p. 65).  Northouse (2010) points out that "ethics is central to leadership, and leaders help to establish and reinforce ethical values" (p. 382).  Clearly, ethical failures can result in catastrophic consequences as in the cases of Enron and Arthur Andersen.  So, ethics is central.  But which ethical values should my non-profit adopt?

Northouse (2010) describes three classifications of ethical conduct:

1. Ethical egoism - a high concern for self and a low concern for others.  Ethical egoism stresses actions that are best for the organization.
2. Utilitarianism - a medium concern for self and a medium concern for others.  Utilitarianism focuses on creating "the greatest good for the greatest number" (Northouse, 2010, p. 379).
3. Altruism - a low concern for self and a high concern for others.  Altruism puts the best interest of others first. (Northouse, 2010).  

Northouse (2010) also points out five principles for ethical leadership: "respect, service, justice, honesty, and community" (p. 386).

Now What?
How do the ideas above influence the choice of ethics for the non-profit?  The organization focuses on others by definition, so ethical egoism will not apply.  While it would be good to reach a great many people with mentoring through musical education (utilitarianism), our first focus is to develop high-quality mentoring relationships.  Because these types of relationships require that we put others before ourselves, the best ethical classification for the organization is Altruism.

In continuing plans for the non-profit, I will incorporate more purposefully the tenets of altruism and Northouse's five principles for ethical leadership.  I will ensure that we treat all youth fairly and with respect as we offer our services.   We will also strive to be honest as we work with the youth through our mentoring, not communicating what they want to hear but communicating what they need to hear.  And I believe our free instruments, lessons, and mentoring will show others that we exist to serve and build a sense of community in our local area.

Photo courtesy of uyo14

Myers Briggs and Me

What?
Home is where the heart is, but it can also be a place of sporadic conflict and misunderstandings.  I'm always seeking to make life at home more harmonious for everyone in my family.  Much of the time, though, I feel like I don't know how to affect the complex interactions between our family members.   How can we all learn about each other so that our interactions make more sense?

So What?

The psychodynamic approach to leadership may provide insights for the interactions between my family members.  According to Carl Jung's approach to the psychodynamic theory of leadership, people have behavioral preferences that "become the basis for how people work, relate, and play" (Jung, 1923, 1993, as referenced in Northouse, 2010).  Accordign to Northouse (2010), Jung identified four personality dimensions that he believes characterize these preferences:

1.  Energy derivation (extraverts derive energy externally, introverts derive energy internally)
2. Information gathering (sensors gather information through practical means such as the five senses, intuiting people gather information through conceptual theoretical frameworks)
3. Decision making (thinkers make decisions based on objective logical analysis, feelers make decisions based on subjective factors such as feelings and empathic responses)
4. Mode of operation (judgers prefer structured methodologies for doing things, perceivers are more willing to go with the flow)

As luck would have it, both my wife and I have taken the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI).  I'm an ENTJ (extravert, intuiting, thinking, judging) and she's a ENFP (extravert, intuiting, feeling, perceiver).  

Now What?
Comparing our MBTI results, I can see that both she and I have similar characteristics such as being extraverted and intuiting.  These traits indicate that we both prefer to "obtain information, inspiration, and energy from outside the self"(Northouse, 2010) and we are conceptual thinkers that prefer to think of what could be.  Both of these qualities describe us well.

What's more interesting is exploring where we differ.  I'm a thinker, whereas my wife is a feeler.  This means that I often come across as cold and calculating when discussing a topic, and I don't often consider the feelings of others in my decision making.  I'm also a judger while my wife is a perceiver.  As a result, I often feel frustrated that she doesn't have a plan for taking care of tasks, isn't organized, and wants to change plans on the spur of the moment.  Writing about them now, I can see these differences play out in our interactions.

I plan to discuss these results with my wife.  I'm curious to know if she sees the same interactions too.  In the short term, I plan to work on taking into account the FP side of her nature.  To do this, I'll try to consider the feelings of others and subjective information in decision making, and I'll attempt to loosen up a little and try to "go with the flow".  Hopefully these efforts will help me to meet her halfway, making our home a more harmonious place.


Image courtesy of donzeladef

Situational Leadership

What?
In my present job at the Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC) Dahlgren Division, I work in a group that executes a variety of tasks.  Some tasks take all year to complete, with well-defined objectives and timelines.  At the other end of the spectrum, other tasks must be completed with little warning and short deadlines (days to weeks).  In addition, I also serve as a mentor for new employees, summer interns, and co-ops working with our group who have little workplace experience and few developed workplace skills.  Several of these employees have voiced concerns about being underutilized, and this has bothered me.  How can I provide them with satisfying work, meet their developmental needs, and ensure productivity while meeting demanding timelines?

So What?
Situational leadership may provide the leadership model needed to mentor the variety of employees in the varying types of work situations we encounter in our group.  According to Northouse (2010), leaders using situational leadership "match their style to the competence and commitment of subordinates".  The competence and commitment of the subordinates may vary over time, so the situational leadership model advocates leadership style varying over time to complement this change.  I have experienced that the commitment of those I mentor is excellent - they just lack the skills necessary to complete many tasks.  According to the situational approach, these employees would be classified as D1 employees "low in competence and high in commitment" (Northouse, 2010).  The situational approach calls for leaders of D1 employees to use an S1 (Directing) style.  The directing style is characterized by a leader who "focuses communication on goal achievement, and spends a smaller amount of time using supportive behaviors" (Northouse, 2010).  This image depicts the various kinds of situational leadership as a function of follower competence and commitment.  The directing style is different from an authoritarian leadership style in that the needs and characteristics of followers are taken into account and have an impact on how the leader acts.

Now What?
I plan to use situational leadership with my current intern.  For the task she is presently working, I will provide clear guidance on what needs to be done and when it needs to be completed.  I will then provide close monitoring of her progress to ensure she is on the right track with her work.  I will also observe closely her development of skill and her level of commitment to see if she has transitioned in her development level.  If she increases her skill level, I will need to switch to a different form of leadership (such as S2 - Coaching) to ensure she stays engaged, happy, and productive.

Hourglass photo courtesy of pdsimao

Youth leadership

What?
The youth program in our church has been struggling for quite some time.  Aside from the instability in the youth leader position (we've had three youth leaders in the last five years), the members of the youth group do not seem to feel that the group belongs to them, teaming does not occur, and the youth consequently do not put much effort towards the group's success.  As a result, the energy required of the youth leader is enormous and he/she becomes burned out easily. 


So What?
The youth group has historically been run in an "interactive lecture" style, where many meetings are spent listening to the leader lecture with a little time at the end spent enjoying activities (biking, hiking, playing games, etc.).  This approach follows the transactional leadership model as defined by Jackson and Parry (2008), where the "leader offers rewards in return for compliance and performance".   The implied transaction is if the members of the group attend and listen to the lecture part, the reward will be the activity part of the meeting.  This approach sends the message that the youth will be doing whatever the lesson plan calls for, with little room for their own plans or initiative.

However, as Jackson and Parry (2008) state, "the most effective leaders are successful at enacting the transformation and the transaction".

By employing transformational leadership, the youth leader should be able to bring about "a transformation in the attitudes and motivations, and consequently behaviors, of followers" (Jackson and Parry, 2008).  The youth leader can exercise the four transformational leadership factors to get there: idealized influence, inspirational motivation, intellectual stimulation, and individualized consideration (Northouse 2010).

Now What?
I plan to meet with the youth group leader and discuss ways in which the youth group might be simultaneously run with transformational and transactional leadership.  In particular, I plan to ask the youth leader the following questions related to the four transformational leadership factors:

1. Idealized influence - is the vision and mission of the group understood by all its members?  Do the members of the group respect and trust one another?
2. Inspirational motivation - are your expectations of the youth communicated to them, and are you expectations high enough to elicit inspiration?
3. Intellectual stimulation - are you allowing the youth to be creative and innovative in this group?  Are they allowed to challenge all beliefs and viewpoints?
4. Individualized consideration - are you able to care for each individual in the group, ensuring they get what they need on a case-by-case basis?

If any of the above answers are "no", I plan to work with the youth group leader until he can answer them in the affirmative.  By adding transformational leadership to the existing transactional leadership, I hope that the youth group can experience "performance that goes well beyond what is expected" (Northouse 2010).


Image courtesy of juliaf

The leadership, it is 'a changin'

What?
Leadership of musicians requires a blend of managerial and leadership skills in order to be effective.  I have been leading the music for a contemporary worship service at Dahlgren United Methodist Church for two years and have learned a lot about leadership in the process.  In my experience, using a single leadership style is insufficient for meeting group goals as the group develops.  The band I currently lead is currently at a crossroads, and my intuition tells me it may be time to switch leadership styles yet again.

So what?
In the early days of the band, I relied primarily on an authoritarian version of leadership, analogous to assigned leadership from Northouse (2010) or basis for authority leadership as defined by Garrick (2004).  According to Annick Brennen,

The Authoritarian Leadership Style is characterized by a leader who makes all the decisions and passes the directives to subordinates who are expected to carry these out under very close supervision.

Authoritarian leadership was necessary because team cohesion was still developing, with members of the band looking for formal guidance at all decision points.  Band members did not exercise initiative early on, so directive orders were necessary.  According to Northouse (2010), I was using legitimate power during this time period based on my position as band leader.

As the band began to form a more cohesive identity and become comfortable with one another, the leadership style I used changed.  Members were becoming more vocal in their preferences and were bringing forth their own ideas for improvement.  The group needed to be led in a different way that focused on conflict resolution and consensus finding, so I switched to an Emotional Intelligence style of leadership, focusing as much on the members of the band as I did on the execution of its mission.

Now what?
Now, the band has a high degree of cohesion and is starting to become restless with the status quo.  All of the members are working together to seek new ways to achieve the group's goal.  This search has led to many deep discussions reflecting on overall vision, mission, effectiveness.  I believe the time is right for my leadership style to switch to inter-personal leadership (Garrick, 2004).  In the short term, I plan to employ principles of servant leadership to elevate the individual the members of the group.  I have also decided to "take my hands off the wheel" and allow the band members to lead themselves.  I hope that these changes in leadership will take the band to the next level.


Guitarist image courtesy of steved_np3

Introduction

This blog documents part of my coursework for VT LDRS 5454 - Leadership Foundations for Diverse Contexts. I will be posting various thoughts related to each week's module readings here. I hope you enjoy and comment on the contents of these pages.

Image courtesy of hoefi