Northcentral University Team Leadership Analysis and Presentation Analyzing team leadership can help you to understand how to benefit your leadership style

Northcentral University Team Leadership Analysis and Presentation Analyzing team leadership can help you to understand how to benefit your leadership style. Using the assigned readings for the course as well as additional applicable scholarly sources, develop a PowerPoint presentation to present to a team you would hypothetically lead within an educational setting of interest. Within your PowerPoint presentation, describe (in sufficient detail) by using supportive reference to cite your team leadership role, including: 1) the leadership approach(es) or style(s) you plan to employ when leading the team, 2) specificity regarding how you plan to utilize these leadership approach(es) or style(s) to lead the team, 3) techniques, strategies, and evaluation procedures to support your team’s performance, and 4) your level of involvement within the day-to-day functionality of the team.Length: 10-12 slides, not including a title slide or reference slidesNotes: Include 200-350 words per slide using the speaker notes section of the PowerPoint.References: 3-5 scholarly resources Shared Leadership
Shared leadership is a dynamic, interactive influence process among individuals in teams in which the objective
is to lead one another to the achievement of team goals. Shared leadership often involves peerbased, or lateral,
influence although at certain times it involves upward or downward hierarchically based influence. The
fundamental distinction between shared leadership and traditional, top-down models of leadership is that
influence does not merely move downward from leaders to subordinates or followers. On the contrary, with
shared leadership, influence is broadly distributed among the members of the team.
Historically, theories of leadership have focused on a single individual and the relationship of that individual to
his or her subordinates or followers. In recent years, however, that conceptualization of leadership has been
challenged. Now, some scholars say that leadership involves behaviors, roles, and activities that can be shared
or distributed among members of a team. According to this alternative conceptualization of leadership,
individuals who are not formally designated leaders can rise to the occasion to exhibit leadership and then step
back at other times to allow others to lead.
WHY THE INCREASED INTEREST IN SHARED LEADERSHIP?
Globalization of markets, hypercompetition, and shortened product life cycles are but a few of the forces driving
organizations toward new modes of organizing. At present, the fastest-growing type of organizational unit is the
team, specifically the temporary cross-functional team, which is valued for its flexibility and its ability to
generate solutions to problems faster than traditional organizational units—flexibility and speed being of the
essence in a hypercompetitive globalized market. What distinguishes a team of this type from traditional
organizational units is the absence of formal hierarchical authority. While a cross-functional team may have an
appointed team leader, this individual is quite commonly a peer, and is treated as such. Outside of the team,
the team leader often does not possess hierarchical authority over other members of the team. Moreover,
because cross-functional teams bring people with diverse backgrounds and types of expertise together for a
common purpose, the leader is often at a knowledge disadvantage—that is, his or her expertise normally
represents only one of the numerous functional specialties brought to the task at hand. Thus, the team leader is
highly dependent upon the expertise of the other team members. Leadership in these types of settings is
therefore determined by an individual’s capacity to influence peers and by the needs of the team in any given
situation. Because the team members bring unique perspectives, knowledge, and capabilities to the team, at
various crossroads in the team’s life, there are moments when each may be called upon to provide leadership.
Shared leadership is also common in virtual teams, another sort of team that is popular at present. Virtual
teams consist of individuals collaborating and working from geographically dispersed locations. Members may
occasionally meet in person, but normally they rely on modern communication technology (e-mail, conferences
in chat rooms, and so forth) for interaction. Importantly, research has shown that technology-mediated
communication differs from face-to-face communication: Communication becomes depersonalized and more
taskfocused in technology-mediated team environments. When communication is more focused on the task and
less preoccupied with authority relationships, leadership can be shared by several team members, with each
providing leadership for different components of the team’s tasks.
There are four fundamental types of leadership that team members might share—directive, transactional,
1
transformational, and empowering. For example, shared directive leadership might be expressed as peers test
one another with a directive “give-and-take” about how to resolve conflicting points of view, approach specific
tasks, or assign accountability. Similarly, shared transactional leadership might be expressed through collegial
recognition of efforts and contributions or through awarding valued rewards based on key performance metrics.
Additionally, teams might engage in shared transformational leadership through peer exhortation or by
appealing to desires to create break-through products or services. Finally, shared empowering leadership might
be expressed in a team through peer-based encouragement and support of self-goal-setting, selfevaluation,
self-reward, and self-development.
To lead people, walk beside them …
As for the best leaders, the people do not notice their existence.
The next best, the people honor and praise.
The next, the people fear;
and the next, the people hate …
When the best leader’s work is done the people say, “We did it ourselves!”
Lao-Tzu
Ironically, while the need and appreciation for shared leadership has been steadily growing, scientific
examination of shared leadership lags seriously behind. In large part, this is due to widely held romantic notions
about leadership: Many people—journalists, reporters, historians, the public at large, and even leadership
scholars—focus on the individual “heroic” leader, disregarding shared forms of leadership.
EVIDENCE OF SHARED LEADERSHIP
To date, there have been very few studies of shared leadership. Nonetheless, the initial evidence suggests that
shared leadership can have a powerful effect on team behavior, attitudes, cognition, and performance, as
outlined below.
Shared Leadership and Team Behavior
Three studies have examined the relationship between shared leadership and team behavior. The first study,
reported in 1996 (Avolio et al.), examined U.S. under-graduate project teams and found shared leadership to be
significantly related to team members’ willingness to put in extra effort on the project. Similarly, a study of
change management teams in the auto industry in the mid-Atlantic United States (Pearce 1997), found shared
leadership to be positively related to citizenship behavior—engaging in behavior that is above and beyond the
call of duty—within the teams and increased networking behavior by team members. Finally, in a study of
virtual teams of social workers in the United States reported in 2003 (Pearce, Yoo, and Alavi), it was found that
teams characterized by shared leadership were more likely to be socially integrated than teams characterized by
vertical leadership. Thus, the initial evidence seems to suggest that shared leadership is an important predictor
of team behavior.
Shared Leadership and Team Attitudes
Two studies have examined the relationship between shared leadership and team attitudes. In the study of
undergraduate students mentioned above, shared leadership was found to be significantly related to satisfaction
on the part of team members. The second study, reported in 2003 (Shamir and Lapidot), examined officer
2
training in the Israeli military. It found that shared leadership was positively correlated to trust in and
satisfaction with the vertical leader. Thus, shared leadership also appears to be an important predictor of
positive team attitudes.
Shared Leadership and Cognition
Four studies have examined the relationship between shared leadership and team cognition. The study of
undergraduate teams revealed a significant relationship between shared leadership and collective efficacy and
potency. The study of change management teams found shared leadership to be significantly related to potency.
The study of virtual teams found shared leadership to be a better predictor of potency than measures of vertical
leadership. Finally, researchers in a 2003 study of research and development labs (Hooker and
Csikszentmihalyi), reported a reciprocal relationship between creativity and shared leadership. Thus, the initial
evidence suggests that shared leadership enhances teams’ cognitive abilities.
Shared Leadership and Team Effectiveness
The study of undergraduate teams found shared leadership to be significantly related to self-ratings of
effectiveness. The study of change management teams found shared leadership to be a better predictor of
manager, customer, and team self-ratings of effectiveness than vertical leadership. The study of virtual teams
found that members of those teams were more likely than people in vertically organized units to rate their own
problem-solving ability and task effectiveness highly. Finally, a study, reported in 2000 (Ensley and Pearce), of
entrepreneurial top management teams across a wide variety of industries in the United States found shared
leadership to be more likely than vertical leadership to lead to increased revenue and improved venture growth
rates. Thus, shared leadership appears to be an important predictor of a team’s overall effectiveness.
MEASURING SHARED LEADERSHIP
To date, five alternate methods have been identified for examining shared leadership. Three of these are
quantitative and questionnaire-based, and two are qualitative observation-based. Three quantitative,
questionnaire-based approaches to the study of shared leadership have involved the study of the team as a (a)
whole, (b) sum of its parts, and (c) social network. In terms of qualitative approaches, the two approaches to
date include (a) leadership sociograms and (b) ethnographic methods. Each of these methods has its own
strengths and weaknesses. While five methodological approaches have been identified for the study of shared
leadership, this is not an exhaustive list of potential methodologies that might be employed in the future study
of shared leadership.
THE FUTURE OF LEADERSHIP IN ORGANIZATIONS
As many leaders are well aware, true teamwork poses many challenges. In many cases it is difficult—even
painful—to implement shared leadership. Ultimately, however, suboptimal teams and overburdened leaders
result in even more pain.
Clearly, shared leadership is not a panacea for all organizational woes: It is only appropriate for certain teambased tasks. Moreover, if team members, particularly the team leader, are resistant to the notion of shared
leadership, it will not be carried out effectively. Resistance to shared leadership is likely a cultural phenomenon,
and cultural norms can be observed at the national, industrial, or even organizational level. As an example, the
cultural attribute of power distance represents the degree to which members of a culture accept and expect that
power will be distributed unequally. Clearly, people in cultures high in power distance are less likely to embrace
the concept of shared leadership. Similarly, shared leadership will not work if the team members lack the
requisite knowledge, skills, and abilities for their task. Another potential complicating factor is that a team may
successfully employ shared leadership, yet work at odds with the overarching organizational mission. These are
but a few of the potential limitations of shared leadership, but they make clear that shared leadership is not a
3
simple plug-and-play technology.
There continues to be a role for vertical leadership. For example, the ultimate responsibility for the making of
meaning and the articulation of purpose continues to rest with vertical, hierarchical leaders. Nonetheless, it
would be foolish to ignore the potential contribution of shared leadership. By examining how both vertical and
shared leadership can be utilized more fully, organizations could move toward a more optimal model of
leadership in the age of teamwork.
—Craig L. Pearce
Further Reading
Avolio, B. J., Jung, D., Murry, W., & Sivasubramaniam, N. (1996). Building highly developed teams: Focusing on
shared leadership process, efficacy, trust, and performance. In M. M. Beyerlein, ed. , D. A. Johnson, ed. , & S.
T. Beyerlein (Eds.), Advances in interdisciplinary studies of work teams (pp. 173–209). Greenwich, CT: JAI
Press.
Cox, J. F., Pearce, C. L., & Sims, Jr., H. P. (2003). Toward a broader agenda for leadership development:
Extending the traditional transactional-transformational duality by developing directive, empowering and shared
leadership skills. In R. Riggio, ed. & S. Murphy (Eds.), The future of leadership development (pp. 161–179).
Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Ellsworth, R. (2003). Leading with purpose: The new corporate realities. Stanford, CA: Stanford University
Press.
Ensley, M. D., & Pearce, C. L. (2000, June). Assessing the influence of leadership behaviors on new venture TMT
processes and new venture performance. Paper presented to the 20th Annual Entrepreneurship Research
Conference, Babson Park, MA.
Gardner, J. (1990). On leadership. New York: Free Press.
Hooker, C., & Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2003). Flow, creativity, and shared leadership: Rethinking the motivation
and structuring of knowledge work. In C. L. Pearce, ed. & J. A. Conger (Eds.), Shared leadership: Reframing the
hows and whys of leadership (pp. 217–234). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Lippman-Blumen, J., & Leavitt, H. J. (2001). Hot groups: Seeding them, feeding them, and using them to ignite
your organization. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Manz, C. C., & Sims, H. P. Jr. (2001). The new superleadership. San Francisco: Berrett Koehler.
Meindl, J. R. and Ehrlich, S. B. The romance of leadership and the evaluation of organizational performance.
Academy of Management Journal vol. 30 no. (1)(1987) pp. 90–109
Mohrman, S. A., Cohen, S. G., & Mohrman, A. M. (1995). Designing team-based organizations: New forms for
knowledge work. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Pearce, C. L. (1997). The determinants of change management team (CMT) effectiveness: A longitudinal
investigation. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Maryland, College Park.
Pearce, C. L., ed. , & Conger, J. A. (Eds.) (2003). Shared leadership: Reframing the hows and whys of
leadership. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Pearce, C. L. and Sims, Jr., H. P. Shared leadership: Toward a multi-level theory of leadership. Advances in
4
Inter-disciplinary Studies of Work Teams vol. 7 (2000) pp. 115–139
Pearce, C. L. and Sims, Jr., H. P. Vertical versus shared leadership as predictors of the effectiveness of change
management teams: An examination of aversive, directive, transactional, transformational, and empowering
leader behaviors. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice vol. 6 no. (2)(2002) pp. 172–197
Pearce, C. L., Perry, M. L., & Sims, H. P. Jr. (2001). Shared leadership: Relationship management to improve
NPO effectiveness. In T. D. Connors (Ed.), The nonprofit handbook: Management (pp. 624–641). New York:
Wiley.
Pearce, C. L., Yoo, Y., & Alavi, M. (in press). Leadership, social work and virtual teams: The relative influence of
vertical vs. shared leadership in the nonprofit sector. In R. E. Riggio, ed. & S. Smith-Orr (Eds.), Improving
leadership in nonprofit organizations. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Perry, M. L., Pearce, C. L., and Sims, H. P. Jr. Empowered selling teams: How shared leadership can contribute
to selling team outcomes. Journal of Personal Selling and Sales Management vol. 19 no. (3)(1999) pp. 35–52
Seers, A. (1996). Better leadership through chemistry: Toward a model of emergent shared team leadership. In
M. M. Beyerlein, D. A. Johnson, ed. , & S. T. Beyerlein (Eds.), Advances in interdisciplinary studies of work
teams (pp. 145–172). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
Shamir, B. & Lapidot, Y. (2003). Shared leadership in the management of group boundaries: A study of
expulsions from officers’ training courses. In C. L. Pearce, ed. & J. A. Conger (Eds.), Shared leadership:
Reframing the hows and whys of leadership (pp. 235–249). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Sivasubramaniam, N., Jung, D. I., Avolio, B. J., and Murry, W. D. A longitudinal model of the effects of team
leadership and group potency on group performance. Group and Organizational Management vol. 27 no. (1)
(2002) pp. 66–96
Entry Citation:
Pearce, Craig L. “Shared Leadership.” Encyclopedia of Leadership. Ed. . Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE, 2004. 1419-23. SAGE Reference
Online. Web. 30 Jan. 2012.
© SAGE Publications, Inc.
Brought to you by: SAGE
5
Journal of Economic Development, Management, IT, Finance and Marketing, 7(1), 30-46, March 30
Leadership Styles of Effective Project Managers: Techniques and Traits to Lead High
Performance Teams
Melissa DuBois, John Hanlon, Jodi Koch, Betty Nyatuga, Nathan Kerr
College of Engineering, Drexel University, USA
mrd87@drexel.edu, jrh349@drexel.edu, jlk88@drexel.edu, bn323@drexel.edu, nsk33@drexel.edu
Abstract
Project management is a growing practice and is being utilized in an increasing number of
facilities. The project manager is at the head of this project process, and has an important role of
overseeing the project and project team, and ultimately ensuring the project ends in success.
Analyzing critical qualities of leadership and determining their positive impact can benefit
project managers in any industry and therefore promote project success. A few of these
leadership styles include: team building, establishing clear relations and roles between project
members, openness, self-confidence, organization, and clearly defining project successes,
reevaluating when necessary. These leadership styles and traits were researched and analyzed to
determine the extent they contribute to the construction, execution, and closure of the project. By
adopting these qualities, the project’s stakeholders such as investors, clients, or patients are more
likely to feel the positive impact of a successful project. Projects can also move more smoothly
and efficiently, receiving positive results in less time. This is beneficial not only to the
stakeholders, but to all members involved: the organization, the project manager, executive staff,
team members, and outsourced facilities. It is not enough to possess one of these crucial traits.
As seen in literature and historical examples, a combination is necessary to create balance and
develop into a leader that can produce an efficient team and satisfactory end results.
Journal of Economic Development, Management, IT, Finance and Marketing, 7(1), 30-46, March 31
Introduction
In today’s increasingly complex global economy and shrinking geography, corporations,
governments, and other organizations are turning to a project management model to facilitate
successful endeavors that enhance their products, services, policies, and procedures. Project
management has proven to be a vehicle to oversee these short-term but strategic ventures. More
than ever, these organizations are recognizing that these projects require not just a project
manager, but a project leader. According to Pandya (2014), project leaders are accountable for
the day-to-day oversight of the project, the triple constraint of time, budget, and quality as any
manager is. However, they also need to manage change, assure resource availability, address
behavioral and emotional flares with internal and external stakeholders, and build relationships
that help create a high performance team. Leaders have vision, honesty and integrity. Leaders
also capably move, motivate and inspire their team and stakeholders to embrace change and the
strategies, tactics and tasks necessary to accomplish the goals at hand (Prabhakar, 2005).
But are these the leadership traits that ensure project management success? Are there
leadership styles and traits that ensure that a leader is effective? Do successful project managers
exhibit these certain styles and traits? In the following paper, current literature was reviewed and
synthesized. The relationship of leadership styles and traits to project success was
identified. Desirable leadership styles and specific traits may enhance project success regardless
of the industry, budget, culture, or geography (Prabhakar, 2005). This is knowledge that will be
beneficial …
Purchase answer to see full
attachment